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

Efficacy of liposomal irinotecan + 5-FU/LV vs. S-1 in gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer: a real-world study using inverse probability of treatment weighting

BACKGROUND

S-1 monotherapy had previously been widely used as a second-line treatment for pancreatic cancer (PC) after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy mainly in Japan. Based on the results of the NAPOLI-1 trial, the recommended second-line therapy is now liposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil/folinic acid (nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV). However, there have been no studies comparing nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV therapy with S-1 monotherapy.

METHODS

The main objective of this study was to compare overall survival (OS) in patients treated with nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV and those treated with S-1 monotherapy as second-line treatments, using the inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method. This study was conducted in 31 institutions participating in Japan Oncology Network in Hepatobiliary and Pancreas. To minimize potential biases due to the retrospective design, IPTW analysis was performed with multiple imputation, and imputed IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using a Cox proportional hazards model and combined into pooled estimates.

RESULTS

A total of 463 metastatic PC patients were enrolled in this study (257 in the S-1 monotherapy group and 206 in the nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV group). The median OS was 7.50 months (95% CI 4.18-12.69 months) in the nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV group and 5.72 months (95% CI 2.76-10.79 months) in the S-1 monotherapy group. In the IPTW-adjusted Cox proportional hazards model, nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV was associated with a significant OS benefit (pooled IPTW-adjusted hazard ratio, 0.779; 95% CI 0.399-0.941; p = 0.025).

CONCLUSION

These findings support the use of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV as standard second-line treatment for PC patients after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

Hypofractionated radiotherapy plus PD-1 antibody and SOX chemotherapy as second-line therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer: a single-arm, phase II clinical trial

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy and safety of concurrent hypofractionated radiotherapy plus anti-PD-1 antibody and SOX chemotherapy in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) after failure of first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with pathologically confirmed mPC who failed standard first-line chemotherapy were enrolled. The patients were treated with a regimen of hypofractionated radiotherapy, SOX chemotherapy, and immune checkpoint inhibitors at our institution. We collected the patients' clinical information and outcome measurements. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was the primary endpoint of the study, followed by disease control rate (DCR), objective response rate (ORR), median overall survival (mOS) and safety. Exploratory analyses included biomarkers related to the benefits.

RESULTS

Between February 24, 2021, and August 30, 2023, twenty-five patients were enrolled in the study, and twenty-three patients who received at least one dose of the study agent had objective efficacy evaluation. The mPFS was 5.48 months, the mOS was 6.57 months, and the DCR and ORR were 69.5% and 30.4%, respectively. Among the seven patients who achieved a PR, the median duration of the response was 7.41 months. On-treatment decreased serum CA19-9 levels were associated with better overall survival. Besides, pretreatment inflammatory markers were associated with tumor response and survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinically meaningful antitumor activity and favorable safety profiles were demonstrated after treatment with these combination therapies in patients with refractory mPC. On-treatment decreased serum CA19-9 levels and pretreatment inflammatory markers platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR), lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) might be biomarkers related to clinical benefits.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.html?proj=130211 , identifier: ChiCTR2100049799, date of registration: 2021-08-09.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid, FOLFIRINOX, and S-1 as second-line treatment for unresectable pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel

This study aimed to compare second-line treatment outcomes for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy. We conducted an integrated analysis of two retrospective studies included 318 patients receiving nanoliposomal irinotecan + 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (NFF) (n = 102), S-1 (n = 57), or FOLFIRINOX (n = 14) as second-line treatment. Median overall survival (OS) in the NFF group was 9.08 months, significantly better than S-1 (4.90 months, P = 0.002). FOLFIRINOX had a median OS of 4.77 months, not statistically different from NFF. Subgroup analyses of OS indicated NFF was generally superior, however, a statistical interaction was observed between the treatment regimen in serum Alb < 3.5 g/dL (P = 0.042) and serum CRP ≥ 0.3 mg/dL (P = 0.006). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.93 months for NFF, significantly better than S-1 (2.53 months, P = 0.024), while FOLFIRINOX had a comparable PFS (3.04 months, P = 0.948). Multivariate analysis identified the serum CRP, serum CA19-9, duration of first-line GnP therapy, and use (yes/no) of S-1 for second-line treatment as independent predictors for OS. This study concludes that second-line NFF therapy demonstrated a more favorable OS compared to S-1 therapy, however, it is still important to consider the patient background characteristics while selecting the most appropriate treatment.

Intra-tumoral administration of CHST15 siRNA remodels tumor microenvironment and augments tumor-infiltrating T cells in pancreatic cancer

The dense stroma is one cause of poor efficacy of T cell-mediated immunotherapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Carbohydrate sulfotransferase 15 (CHST15) is a proteoglycan-synthetic enzyme responsible for remodeling tumor stroma. Intra-tumoral injection of CHST15 small interfering RNA (siRNA) has been shown to increase the tumor-infiltrating T cells (TILs) in patients with unresectable PDAC. However, the mechanism underlying the enhanced accumulation of TILs is not fully explored. Here, we demonstrate that intra-tumoral injection of CHST15 siRNA locally and remotely diminishes myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSCs) and enhances TILs in mice. CHST15 was expressed by tumor cells and MDSCs in both tumor and tumor-draining lymph nodes (TDLNs), and CHST15 siRNA repressed stromal density, neutrophil extracellular traps, and Ly6C/G+ MDSCs in vivo. Remarkably, tumor growth inhibition was only observed in the immunocompetent KPC model, which is associated with enhanced TILs. In vitro, CHST15 siRNA significantly downregulated the levels of CHST15 and indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase mRNA in CD33+ MDSCs derived from human peripheral blood mononuclear cells. These results suggest a dual role for intra-tumorally injected CHST15 siRNA on modulating the tumor immune microenvironment for T cell entry and remotely diminishing CHST15+ MDSCs, decreasing T cell suppression and expanding T cells in the TDLN, ultimately leading to an enhanced accumulation of TILs.

Efficacy and safety of second-line therapy by S-1 combined with sintilimab and anlotinib in pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastasis: a single-arm, phase II clinical trial

Background

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma carries a grim prognosis, and there are few recognized effective second-line treatment strategies. We attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of S-1, sintilimab, and anlotinib as a second-line treatment in pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastasis.

Methods

Pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastases were recruited. S-1 was administered orally at 25 mg/m2 bid, anlotinib was administered orally at 12 mg qd from day 1 to day 14, and sintilimab was administered intravenously at 200 mg on day 1. This method was repeated every 21 days, and the therapeutic effect was evaluated every 3 cycles. The primary outcome was the objective response rate (ORR).

Results

Overall, 23 patients were enrolled in this study of whom 19 patients had objective efficacy evaluation. The ORR was 10.5% (95% CI 0.4%-25.7%) in the evaluable population. The progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.53 (95% CI 2.50-7.50) months, and the overall survival (mOS) was 8.53 (95% CI 4.97-14.20) months. Grade 3 adverse events were 26.1%, and no grade 4 or above adverse events occurred. High-throughput sequencing was performed on the tumor tissues of 16 patients; patients with HRD-H (n = 10) had shorter PFS than those with HRD-L (n = 6) (2.43 vs. 5.45 months; P = 0.043), but there was no significant difference in OS between the two groups (4.43 vs. 9.35 months; P = 0.11).

Conclusions

This study suggests the advantage of S-1 combined with sintilimab and anlotinib in extending OS as a second-line therapy in pancreatic cancer patients with liver metastasis. Clinical Trial Registration: ChiCTR2000030659.

Analysis of the cost-effectiveness of proton beam therapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND

Proton beam therapy (PBT) has recently been included in Japan's social health insurance benefits package. This study aimed to determine the cost-effectiveness of PBT for unresectable, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) as a replacement for conventional photon radiotherapy (RT).

METHODS

We estimated the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of PBT as a replacement for three-dimensional conformal RT (3DCRT), a conventional photon RT, using clinical evidence in the literature and expense complemented by expert opinions. We used a decision tree and an economic and Markov model to illustrate the disease courses followed by LAPC patients. Effectiveness was estimated as quality-adjusted life years (QALY) using utility weights for the health state. Social insurance fees were calculated as the costs. The stability of the ICER against the assumptions made was appraised using sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

The effectiveness of PBT and 3DCRT was 1.67610615 and 0.97181271 QALY, respectively. The ICER was estimated to be ¥5,376,915 (US$46,756) per QALY. According to the suggested threshold for anti-cancer therapy from the Japanese authority of ¥7,500,000 (US$65,217) per QALY gain, such a replacement would be considered cost-effective. The one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses demonstrated stability of the base-case ICER.

CONCLUSION

PBT, as a replacement for conventional photon radiotherapy, is cost-effective and justifiable as an efficient use of finite healthcare resources. Making it a standard treatment option and available to every patient in Japan is socially acceptable from the perspective of health economics.

STNM01, the RNA oligonucleotide targeting carbohydrate sulfotransferase 15, as second-line therapy for chemotherapy-refractory patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer: An open label, phase I/IIa trial

BACKGROUND

The impact of stroma-targeting therapy on tumor immune suppression is largely unexplored. An RNA oligonucleotide, STNM01, has been shown to repress carbohydrate sulfotransferase 15 (CHST15) responsible for tumor proteoglycan synthesis and matrix remodeling. This phase I/IIa study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of STNM01 in patients with unresectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

This was an open-label, dose-escalation study of STNM01 as second-line therapy in gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel-refractory PDAC. A cycle comprised three 2-weekly endoscopic ultrasound-guided locoregional injections of STNM01 at doses of 250, 1,000, 2,500, or 10,000 nM in combination with S-1 (80-120 mg twice a day for 14 days every 3 weeks). The primary outcome was the incidence of dose-liming toxicity (DLT). The secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), tumor response, changes in tumor microenvironment on immunohistopathology, and safety (jRCT2031190055).

FINDINGS

A total of 22 patients were enrolled, and 3 cycles were repeated at maximum; no DLT was observed. The median OS was 7.8 months. The disease control rate was 77.3%; 1 patient showed complete disappearance of visible lesions in the pancreas and tumor-draining lymph nodes. Higher tumoral CHST15 expression was associated with poor CD3⁺ and CD8⁺ T cell infiltration at baseline. STNM01 led to a significant reduction in CHST15, and increased tumor-infiltrating CD3⁺ and CD8⁺ T cells in combination with S-1 at the end of cycle 1. Higher fold increase in CD3⁺ T cells correlated with longer OS. There were 8 grade 3 adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

Locoregional injection of STNM01 was well tolerated in patients with unresectable PDAC as combined second-line therapy. It prolonged survival by enhancing T cell infiltration in tumor microenvironment.

FUNDING

The present study was supported by the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development (AMED).

Clinical Outcomes of S-1 Monotherapy and Modified FOLFIRINOX Therapy after Gemcitabine plus Nab-paclitaxel Therapy in Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer

Objective S-1 and modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) were often used as the second-line chemotherapies after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) in unresectable pancreatic cancer (UPC) until nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin therapy was approved as an alternative in Japan in 2020. However, the clinical outcomes of S-1 and mFFX after GnP have scarcely been reported. Therefore, we retrospectively studied them. Methods We extracted the clinical data of 86 patients with UPC who received second-line chemotherapy after GnP between 2015 and 2020. Among the patients who had a good organ functions and no massive ascites, 41 patients treated with S-1 and 21 treated with mFFX were enrolled. Results Compared to S-1, mFFX tended to be used for younger patients with a good general condition (median age, 63 vs. 71 years, p<0.01; and performance status 0, 67% vs. 37%, p<0.05). The median progression-free and overall survival were similar between the S-1 (3.7 and 7.2 months, respectively) and mFFX (3.3 and 7.4 months, respectively) groups. The response rate in patients with measurable lesions was 4% (n=1/23) in the S-1 group and 17% (n=2/12) in the mFFX group. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 20% in the S-1 group and 57% (neutrophil count decreased in 43%) in the mFFX group (p<0.01). Conclusion S-1 and mFFX were both acceptable second-line chemotherapies after GnP therapy for UPC, although attention should be paid to myelosuppression during mFFX treatment. Further studies involving nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin therapy are necessary to facilitate the selection of the optimal regimen for each patient.

Validation of the eighth edition of the AJCC staging system for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma initially receiving chemoradiotherapy and proposal of modifications

Objective: To validate the eighth edition of the AJCC staging system in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma receiving only stereotactic body radiation therapy and chemotherapy, and to propose modifications to improve prognostic accuracy.

Methods: Patients with pathologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma without metastasis who were undergoing only chemoradiotherapy were included and staged according to the seventh and eighth editions of the AJCC staging system. Meanwhile, another group of stage T4 patients from the above enrollment with only portal vein involvement with or without tumor thrombi (PV ± PVTT) were retrieved for survival comparisons. Modifications were proposed according to the survival comparisons. A cohort from the SEER database was used for external validation of the modified staging system.

Results: A total of 683 patients were included. Patients with N2 or N1 but different T stages had significantly different survival outcomes according to the eighth edition. The survival of patients with PV ± PVTT was comparable to that of patients with T4 tumors. The concordance index of the seventh and eighth editions, and the modified staging system was 0.744 (95%CI: 0.718–0.769), 0.750 (95%CI: 0.725–0.775), and 0.788 (95%CI: 0.762–0.813), respectively. For external validation, the concordance index was 0.744 (95%CI: 0.718–0.770), 0.750 (95%CI: 0.724–0.776), and 0.788 (95%CI: 0.762–0.814), respectively.

Conclusions: The modified staging system is suggested to have the most accurate prognostic value. Hence, PV ± PVTT should be added to the definition of T4 tumors regardless of tumor size. Patients with N2 or N1 in different T stages could be regrouped into different substages. Additionally, stage III should be subclassified into IIIA (T3N2 and T4N0) and IIIB (T4N1-2).

Modified FOLFIRINOX versus S-1 as second-line chemotherapy in gemcitabine-failed metastatic pancreatic cancer patients: A randomised controlled trial (MPACA-3)

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) as a second-line chemotherapy treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPAC), remains unclear. This multi-center randomised phase III trial aimed to elucidate the efficacy of mFOLFIRINOX as a second-line chemotherapy treatment for mPAC patients with good performance status.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eighty mPAC patients (age, 19-75 years) refractory to first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were randomly selected to receive mFOLFIRINOX or S-1. mFOLFIRINOX comprised oxaliplatin (65 mg/m²), irinotecan (135 mg/m²), and leucovorin (400 mg/m²) on day 1 and continuous 5-FU infusion (1000 mg/m²) over 24 h on days 1-2 every 2 weeks. S-1 comprised body surface area-dependent oral S-1, divided into two doses per day on days 1-28 every 6 weeks.

RESULTS

Overall survival was the primary endpoint. The objective response and disease control rates were higher in the mFOLFIRINOX than in the S-1 group (15% versus 2%; p = .04 and 67% versus 37%; p = .007). The median progression-free survival rates were 5.2 and 2.2 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 groups, respectively (adjusted hazard ratio [HR]: .4; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .2-.6; p < .001). The median overall survival rates were 9.2 and 4.9 months in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 groups, respectively (adjusted HR: .4; 95% CI: .2-.7; p = .002). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 56% and 17% of the patients in the mFOLFIRINOX and S-1 groups, respectively (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Administration of mFOLFIRINOX as a second-line chemotherapy treatment for mPAC patients refractory to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy resulted in increased survival rates than S-1 treatment alone.

Impact of Renal Function on S-1 + Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: An Integrated Analysis of Data From 2 Clinical Trials

OBJECTIVES

S-1 monotherapy with concurrent radiotherapy (RT) is a standard of care for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Although renal dysfunction increases S-1 monotherapy toxicity, its effect in S-1 with concurrent RT remains unknown. We evaluated the effect of renal function on the safety of S-1 with RT for LAPC.

METHODS

We performed an integrated exploratory post hoc analysis of data from 2 prospective studies (JCOG1106 and LAPC-S1RT), where patients with LAPC received RT (50.4 Gy/28 fraction for 5.5 weeks) and concurrent S-1 (40 mg/m2 per dose, twice daily on the day of irradiation). We split the patients into high creatinine clearance (CCr; ≥80 mL/min) and low CCr (<80 mL/min) groups and compared the findings to determine treatment safety.

RESULTS

The high and low CCr groups showed a median of 97.5 (range, 80.0-194.6) and 64.4 (range, 50.0-78.3) mL/min, respectively. The low CCr group presented more adverse reactions (ARs) of grade 3 or higher and gastrointestinal ARs of grade 2 or higher than the high CCr group (30.8% vs 15.8% and 51.9% vs 36.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of ARs associated with concurrent S-1 and RT increases in patients with low CCr; therefore, ARs should be duly considered in such patients.

Development and Validation of Multicenter Predictive Nomograms for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer After Chemoradiotherapy

OBJECTIVE

Due to common practice of hypofractionated radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer and heterogeneous chemotherapy regimens in previous studies, modified nomograms are required. Therefore, we aim to develop and validate prognostic nomograms for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) after stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and chemotherapy.

METHODS

The development cohort comprised 925 patients with LAPC receiving SBRT and gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in our center, while 297 patients from another two centers formed the validation cohort. Nomograms were created from COX models and internally validated by bootstrap. Model discriminations were evaluated by calibration plots and concordance index (C-index). A decision curve analysis (DCA) was performed to evaluate clinical benefits of nomograms. Additionally, recursive partitioning analysis (RPA) was used for stratifications of survival probability based on the total score of each patient calculated by nomograms.

RESULTS

Weight loss, tumor diameter, radiation dose, CA19-9 kinetics after treatment and surgical resection were included in the nomogram for overall survival (OS), while the five factors plus performance status formed the nomogram for progression free survival (PFS). The corrected C-indexes for estimated 1-year and 2-year OS of the development cohort were 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85-0.91) and 0.86 (95% CI: 0.83-0.90). For those of the validation cohort, it was 0.88 (95% CI: 0.82-0.94) and 0.83 (95% CI: 0.74-0.91). Additionally, the corrected C-index for predicted 1-year PFS in the development and validation cohort was 0.83 (95% CI: 0.81-0.86) and 0.82 (95% CI: 0.78-0.87), respectively. The calibration plots showed good agreement of 1- and 2-year OS and 1-year PFS between the estimations and actual observations. Potential clinical benefits were demonstrated with DCA. Additionally, for 1- and 2-year OS and 1-year PFS, patients were stratified into four groups with different survival probability by RPA.

CONCLUSION

The validated nomograms provided useful predictions of OS and PFS for LAPC with chemoradiotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of modified fluorouracil/leucovorin plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) compared with S-1 as second-line chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

The optimal standard second-line chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) remains unclear. Here, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of modified fluorouracil/leucovorin plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) compared with oral fluoropyrimidine S-1 as a second-line chemotherapy in patients with MPC.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 76 consecutive patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent mFOLFIRINOX or S-1 treatment as a second-line chemotherapy after gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) failure at our department between December 2014 and February 2019.

RESULTS

Patients who underwent mFOLFIRINOX treatment exhibited significantly better objective response rates (ORRs) and progression-free survival (PFS) than S-1 (ORR, 20.0% vs 0%, P = 0.003; PFS, 3.7 vs 2.1 months, P = 0.010). Although baseline patient characteristics of age, performance status, and serum albumin levels differed significantly between the two groups, mFOLFIRINOX was identified as an independent factor of favorable PFS on multivariate analyses. Grade 3-4 neutropenia and peripheral sensory neuropathy occurred more frequently in the mFOLFIRINOX group. The median overall survival from the initiation of second-line chemotherapy was not significantly longer in the mFOLFIRINOX group than in the S1 group (8.5 vs 5.8 months, respectively; P = 0.213); however, the 8-month survival rate was significantly higher in the mFOLFIRINOX group (56.0% vs 27.5%, respectively; P = 0.030).

CONCLUSIONS

mFOLFIRINOX as a second-line regimen contributed to favorable treatment outcomes, but induced more frequent adverse events than S-1. On multivariate analyses, mFOLFIRINOX was identified as an independent factor with favorable PFS, suggesting that mFOLFIRINOX could be a promising treatment option for patients with GnP failure.

Immunotherapeutic approach for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the USA and the seventh leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Most of the patients' presentation is in advanced stages and remains resistant to currently available standard therapies. An in-depth understanding of PDAC's pathogenesis has shown that immunotherapy could bring about a revolution in the treatment response. Immunotherapy in PDAC appears promising in preclinical studies but failed to show benefits in clinical studies. These novel agents' therapeutic failure can be attributed to multiple variables including the tumor microenvironment, early metastasis, tumor heterogeneity and resistance to therapy. There is a need to develop biomarkers for the patient's stratification and provide individualized treatment to improve treatment outcomes.

Failure patterns and outcomes of dose escalation of stereotactic body radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a multicenter cohort study

Objective

This study aims to compare recurrence patterns and outcomes of biologically effective dose (BED₁₀, α/β = 10) of 60-70 Gy with those of a BED₁₀ >70 Gy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

Methods

Patients from three centers with a biopsy and a radiographically proven LAPC were retrospectively included and data were prospectively collected from June 2012 to June 2019. Radiotherapy was delivered by stereotactic body radiation therapy. Recurrences were categorized as in-field, marginal, and outside-the-field recurrence. Patients in two groups were required to receive abdominal enhanced contrast CT or MRI every 2-3 months and CA19-9 examinations every month during follow-up. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated every month. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

After propensity score matching, there were 486 patients in each group. The median prescription dose of the two groups was 37 Gy/5-8 f (range: 36-40.8 Gy/5-8 f) and 42 Gy/5-8 f (range: 40-49.6 Gy/5-8 f), respectively. The median OS of patients with a BED₁₀ >70 Gy and a BED₁₀ 60-70 Gy was 20.3 months (95% CI: 19.1-21.5 months) and 18.2 months (95% CI: 17.8-18.6 months) respectively (p < 0.001). The median PFS of the two cohorts was 15.4 months (95% CI: 14.2-16.6 months) and 13.3 months (95% CI: 12.9-13.7 months) respectively (p < 0.001). A higher incidence of in-field and marginal recurrence was found in patients with BED₁₀ of 60-70 Gy (in-field: 97/486 versus 72/486, p = 0.034; marginal: 109/486 versus 84/486, p = 0.044). However, more patients with BED₁₀ >70 Gy had grade 2 or 3 acute (87/486 versus 64/486, p = 0.042) and late gastrointestinal toxicities (77/486 versus 55/486, p = 0.039) than those with BED₁₀ of 60-70 Gy.

Conclusion

BED₁₀ >70 Gy was found to have the best survival benefits along with a higher incidence of acute and late gastrointestinal toxicities. Therefore, a higher dose may be required in the case of patients' good tolerance.

Hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy with concurrent chemotherapy for elderly patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma

BACKGROUND

It is important to understand how elderly patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC) should be treated, since the number of elderly cancer patients will increase. However, the optimal treatment for elderly patients with LAPC remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) with concurrent gemcitabine for elderly patients with LAPC.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the data from LAPC patients aged ≥ 75 years treated with hypofractionated IMRT (48 Gy in 15 fractions) with concurrent weekly gemcitabine at our institution from February 2013 to December 2018. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), locoregional progression-free survival (LRPFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and the pattern of recurrence and toxicity were analysed.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients received treatment during the study period. The median age was 78 years (range 75-86 years), and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of all patients was 0-1. The median survival time (MST) and median PFS were 20.4 [95% confidence interval (CI) 10.3-36.8] and 13.5 (95% CI 6.4-20.3) months, respectively, and the 1-year OS and PFS rates were 80.0% (95% CI 50-93.1%) and 66.7% (95% CI 37.5-84.6%), respectively. The median LRPFS and median DMFS were 15.6 (95% CI 6.4-36.8) and 14.9 (95% CI 7.0-20.5) months, respectively, and the 1-year LRPFS and DMFS rates were 73.3% (95% CI 43.6-89.1%) and 66.7% (95% CI 37.5-84.6%), respectively. Non-haematologic grade 3 toxicity was observed in three cases, of which only one was induced by radiotherapy, whereas grade 4-5 non-haematologic acute or late toxicities were not observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The OS and PFS of elderly patients with LAPC treated using hypofractionated IMRT with concurrent gemcitabine were favourable and without the occurrence of severe toxicity. This treatment strategy is feasible and promising for elderly LAPC patients with good PS.

Efficacy of S-1 in second-line chemotherapy after nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Second-line (2 L) chemotherapy is important for improved survival. However, the efficacy of S-1 after nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (AG) for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) remains unclear.

AIM

We retrospectively investigated the clinical impact of S-1 after AG.

METHODS AND RESULTS

From January 2015 to July 2018, 37 patients with APC underwent AG as first-line chemotherapy at our institute. Of these patients, 14 (38%) underwent S-1 as 2 L chemotherapy after AG (S-1 group), five (14%) received another agent after AG, and 18 (49%) underwent no 2 L chemotherapy (best supportive care [BSC] group). The clinical features were retrospectively compared between the S-1 and BSC groups. Prognostic factors for residual survival (RS) were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model. The induction rate of 2 L chemotherapy was 51%, and most patients received S-1 monotherapy (74%). The disease control rate and progression-free survival duration were 57.1% and 2.8 months, respectively. The median RS duration in the S-1 and BSC groups was 5.2 and 2.4 months, respectively; this difference was statistically significant (hazard ratio, 0.33; P = .005). The median overall survival duration in the S-1 and BSC groups was 12.3 and 5.0 months, respectively; this difference was also statistically significant (hazard ratio, 0.26; P = .001). The efficacy of S-1 in 2L chemotherapy for RS was identified in the multivariate analysis, as was age (<65 vs ≥65 y) and the presence of liver metastasis.

CONCLUSION

The antitumor activity of S-1 was retained after AG, and the induction of S-1 after AG might improve the prognosis of patients with APC.

Oral chemotherapy for second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

There is no standard therapy for second-line treatment of gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer patients with poor performance status. A combination of chemotherapy drugs 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan can be considered as second-line treatment for such patients; however, due to toxicity, none of the regimens are recommended for patients with poor performance. Capecitabine or S-1 has relatively low toxicity and can be considered a treatment option for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and toxicity of oral chemotherapy as second-line treatment in patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients who had progressive disease after first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed between January 2011 and December 2018. They were treated with capecitabine or S-1 as the second-line treatment. Capecitabine was administered as a 2500 mg/m² divided dose on days 1-14, followed by a 1-wk rest. S-1 was taken orally based on the patient’s body surface area for 28 d, followed by 2-wk of rest. Progression-free survival and overall survival were used to compare efficacy of capecitabine and S-1.

RESULTS

Of the 81 patients, 41 were treated with capecitabine and 40 with S-1. The median time to treatment failure in both groups was 1.5 mo (P = 0.425). The objective response rate was similar in the two groups: 9.8% with capecitabine and 2.5% with S-1 (P = 0.359). Median progression-free survival was longer in the S-1 group than in the capecitabine group (S-1 2.7 mo, capecitabine 2.0 mo, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the median overall survival between the capecitabine and S-1 groups (4.3 mo vs 5.0 mo, P = 0.092). Grade 3 or 4 hand-foot syndrome was significantly more common in the capecitabine group than in the S-1 group (14.6% vs 0%, P = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

Capecitabine or S-1 can be used as a second-line treatment for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer with poor performance status after progression to a gemcitabine-based regimen.

Helical tomotherapy for chemo-refractory multiple liver metastases

Background

Despite advances in chemotherapy, curing multiple liver metastases is quite rare. Even when response is obtained, regrowth of the tumors is almost inevitable. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of helical tomotherapy for chemo‐refractory multiple liver metastases.

Methods

Forty‐five patients with chemo‐refractory multiple (3‐10) liver metastases after standard systemic chemotherapy entered the single‐institutional prospective study. Liver metastases were the major disease; however, 31 also had uncontrolled primary lesions and/or other metastases. The prescribed dose was 55 Gy in 25 fractions. The median planning target volume (PTV) and normal liver volume (NLV) of first treatment were 128 cm³ and 1175 cm³, respectively. The median of V_15Gy, V_30Gy, and mean dose to NLV were 45%, 23%, and 19.4 Gy, respectively.

Results

Forty‐two patients (93%) completed the planned treatment. Median survival time (MST) for all patients was 8 months, and the 1‐year survival rate was 29%. The median local control (LC) period was 5 months and the 6‐month control rate of irradiated tumors was 33%. A ≥30% decrease in tumor markers was observed in 31%. The most common grade 3 toxicity was lymphocytopenia (40%), followed by fatigue (6%). Radiation‐induced liver disease (RILD) was not observed. Pancreatic cancer as the primary tumor, distant metastases outside the liver, low pretreatment neutrophil‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (NLR), and low pretreatment monocyte‐to‐lymphocyte ratio (MLR) were associated with poorer prognoses.

Conclusions

Helical tomotherapy for chemo‐refractory multiple liver metastases is a feasible and potentially effective treatment. Incorporating tomotherapy into the first‐line treatment in combination with systemic chemotherapy should be considered.

Trial registration number

CROG 12005.

Clinical Outcomes of Second-Line Chemotherapy after Progression on Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Since the introduction of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P+GEM) as first-line (1L) treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), optimal second-line (2L) chemotherapy after progression is unclear. We assessed clinical outcomes of 2L chemotherapy for disease that progressed on 1L nab-P+GEM.

Materials and Methods

Among the 203 patients previously treated with 1L nab-P+GEM for mPDAC at Asan Medical Center, between February and December 2016, records of 120 patients receiving 2L chemotherapy after progression on nab-P+GEM were retrospectively reviewed. The response rate and survival were evaluated along with analysis of prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin doublets (FOLFOX or XELOX) were used in 78 patients (65.0%), fluoropyrimidine monotherapy in 37 (30.8%), and liposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil in two (1.7%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.29 months and 7.33 months from the start of 2L therapy. Fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin regimens and fluoropyrimidine monotherapy did not yield significantly different median PFS (2.89 months vs. 3.81 months, p=0.40) or OS (7.04 months vs. 7.43 months, p=0.86). A high neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (> 2.2) and a short time to progression with 1L nab-P+GEM (< 6.4 months) were independent prognostic factors of poor OS with 2L therapy.

CONCLUSION

2L fluoropyrimidine-oxaliplatin doublets and fluoropyrimidine monotherapy after failure of 1L nab-P+GEM had modest efficacy, with no differences in treatment outcomes between them. Further investigation is warranted for the optimal 2L chemo-regimens and sequencing of systemic chemotherapy for patients with mPDAC.

Systemic chemotherapy in combination with liver-directed therapy improves survival in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and synchronous liver metastases

OBJECTIVES

We investigated whether the combination of systemic chemotherapy (SCT) and liver-directed therapy (LDT) was superior to chemotherapy alone for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma and synchronous liver metastases (PACLM).

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 184 patients treated with SCT ± LDT at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Hospital from 2001 to 2015. Overall survival (OS) was the primary end-point. The role of treatment modality and other clinical factors was evaluated by univariate and Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty-four (34.8%) patients in the SCT-LDT group and 120 (65.2%) patients in the SCT group were included in the analysis. Baseline clinical characteristics were similar between the groups (all P > 0.05). The median survival was 8.7 months in the SCT-LDT group and was 6.3 months in the SCT group. The 0.5-, 1-, 2- and 3-year survival rates were 67.2%, 33.4%, 13.3% and 8.9%, respectively, after SCT-LDT, and were 54.9%, 19.0%, 4.5% and 2.0%, respectively, after SCT (P = 0.01). Primary tumor size, ascites, and treatment modality (SCT + LDT vs. SCT) independently predicted survival (P < 0.05). The clinical efficacy congruously favored the SCT-LDT group across the majority of subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

SCT combined with LDT was well tolerated and may be effective to improve survival of patients with PACLM. Ascites and large primary tumor size were poor prognostic factors associated with survival.

TAS-118 (S-1 plus leucovorin) versus S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study (GRAPE trial)

BACKGROUND

In our previous randomised phase 2 study for patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer, S-1 plus leucovorin improved progression-free survival compared with S-1 alone. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of TAS-118 (S-1 plus leucovorin) versus S-1 in overall survival (OS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This randomised, open-label, phase 3 study was conducted at 58 centres in Japan and Korea. Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer that progressed during first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy or recurred during or after post-operative gemcitabine-based adjuvant treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either S-1 (40-60 mg, twice daily for 4 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or TAS-118 (S-1 40-60 mg plus leucovorin 25 mg, twice daily for 1 week in a 2-week cycle). The primary end-point was OS.

RESULTS

A total of 603 patients were randomised, and 300 and 301 patients received TAS-118 and S-1, respectively. There was no difference in OS between groups (median OS for TAS-118 versus S-1, 7.6 months versus 7.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.98 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.82-1.16]; P = 0.756). Progression-free survival was significantly longer with TAS-118 than S-1 (median, 3.9 months versus 2.8 months; HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.67-0.95]; P = 0.009). There were interactions between Japan and Korea (P = 0.004) and between unresectable and recurrent disease (P = 0.025) in OS. Incidence, profile and severity of adverse events were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

TAS-118 did not improve OS in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer compared to S-1. Further studies are needed to find patients who have benefit from adding leucovorin to S-1.

Health-related quality of life for gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel plus radiotherapy versus gemcitabine and S-1 plus radiotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

Purpose

To compare the effects of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GT) plus stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) or gemcitabine and S-1 (GS) plus SBRT on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Methods

Patients with biopsy-proven and radiographically metastatic pancreatic cancer were included. HRQOL was assessed using the Chinese version of Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and 5-level European quality of life 5-dimensions (EQ-5D-5L). Data were analyzed with Spearman’s rank correlation, ordinal regression, and propensity score-matched analysis.

Results

A total of 75 and 89 patients received GT and GS, respectively. The median biological effective dose of GT group and GS group was 59.5 Gy (range 48–85.5 Gy) and 64.4 Gy (range 52.48–85.5 Gy) in 5–8 fractions, respectively. More patients in the GS group had improvement in BPI and EQ-5D-5L compared with those in the GT group (n=38 vs n=15, P<0.001; n=42 vs n=20, P<0.001). No differences of BPI scores were found between pre- and post-treatment in each group, while only the post-treatment EQ-5D-5L score was higher than that at baseline in GS the group (P<0.001). Compared with GS group, it was unlikely for patients receiving GT to have better BPI and EQ-5D-5L. After propensity-matched analysis, more patients in GS group had improvement in BPI and EQ-5D-5L (n=24 vs n=12, P=0.002; n=28 vs n=16, P=0.002). Furthermore, patients with GS had a superior overall survival than those with GT (11.1 months [95% CI: 10.6–11.6 months] vs 9.9 months [95% CI: 8.8–11.0 months]; P=0.005). Both incidences of grade 3 hematological (P=0.024) and gastrointestinal (P=0.049) toxicities were higher in the GT group.

Conclusion

GS may achieve better HRQOL than GT. Therefore, GS may be an alternative of GT for metastatic pancreatic cancer, especially for Asians.

ZBTB7 evokes 5-fluorouracil resistance in colorectal cancer through the NF‑κB signaling pathway

Zinc finger and BTB domain containing 7A (ZBTB7), a POZ/BTB and Krüppel erythroid myeloid oncogenic factor, is critical for the tumorigenicity and progression of various cancer types. ZBTB7 has been reported to promote the cell proliferation of colorectal cancers (CRC). However, the function of ZBTB7 to 5-fluorouracil (5‑FU) resistance has not yet been studied. In the current study, ZBTB7 expression and function in 5‑FU resistance in CRC were investigated using with multidisciplinary approaches, including western blot analysis, Transwell assay, CCK8 and a tumor xenograft model. Overexpression of ZBTB7 was increased the level of proteins associated with cell invasion and epithelial-mesenchymal transition. ZBTB7 inhibition attenuated the invasion and enhanced the apoptosis of CRC cells. IC50 values and cell viability were significantly reduced in cells with short hairpin RNA (shRNA)-mediated ZBTB7 depletion compared with the control group. 5‑FU administration decreased viability to a greater extent in the ZBTB7-shRNA group compared with the control, which was dose- and time-dependent. Analysis of gene expression omnibus data demonstrated that ZBTB7 mediated 5‑FU resistance, potentially through nuclear factor (NF)-κB signaling. NF‑κB inhibitor SN50 reversed ZBTB7-induced resistance in CRC. Collectively, the findings demonstrated that ZBTB7 mediated 5‑FU resistance in CRC cells through NF‑κB signaling. Thus, targeting ZBTB7 and NF‑κB signaling may be an effective strategy to reverse 5‑FU resistance in CRC.

Current status and dilemma of second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: is there a silver lining?

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal malignant diseases worldwide. The majority of patients present with advanced disease and, therefore, need palliative chemotherapy. Some chemotherapeutic regimens have been well established as first-line therapies and have been shown to increase survival; however, almost all patients with advanced pancreatic cancer will experience disease progression after first-line therapy. Nevertheless, many patients who retain good performance status after initial treatment remain good candidates for additional therapy. Historically, few studies have assessed second-line therapy, with most reports representing small phase II trials with variable findings; however, clinical research for second-line treatment has increased in the past decade, and several randomized controlled trials using different regimens have been published. The current literature shows varying results on treatment efficacy and tolerability. Thus, we reviewed the published data on the use of chemotherapy in the second-line setting for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Phase I study of resminostat, an HDAC inhibitor, combined with S-1 in patients with pre-treated biliary tract or pancreatic cancer

Resminostat is an oral hydroxamate inhibitor of class I, IIb, and IV histone deacetylases. S-1 is widely used to treat biliary tract cancer and pancreatic cancer in Japan. We performed a phase I study of resminostat combined with S-1 as second-line or later therapy in Japanese patients with biliary tract or pancreatic cancer. A total of 27 patients were enrolled. We determined the optimal regimen for resminostat/S-1 therapy in part 1, and investigated its safety and efficacy in part 2. In part 1, 17 patients were enrolled. One DLT (anorexia and stomatitis, respectively) occurred with each of regimens 2 and 3. In part 2, an additional 10 patients received regimen 3, which was selected in part 1. Regimen 3 was resminostat (200 mg/day on Days 1 to 5 and Days 8 to 12: 5 days on/2 days off) plus S-1 (80-120 mg/day according to body surface area on Days 1 to 14) repeated every 21 days. A total of 16 patients (13 with biliary tract cancer and 3 with pancreatic cancer) received regimen 3 and it was well tolerated. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were thrombocytopenia and anorexia (11 patients each, 69%). The disease control rate was 81.3% (84.6% for biliary tract cancer and 66.7% for pancreatic cancer, respectively). Median progression-free survival was 3.1 months (5.5 and 2.3 months), while median overall survival was 8.8 months (10.2 and 4.7 months). In conclusion, regimen 3 was well tolerated by patients with pre-treated biliary tract or pancreatic cancer.

Second-line chemotherapy for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer after first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy: a network meta-analysis

Guidelines for treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer recommend a second line based on Fluoropyrimidine (FP) alone or in combination with Oxaliplatin (OXA) or Irinotecan (IRI) after a first line treatment based on Gemcitabine (GEM). We conducted a Bayesian network meta-analysis to compare currently available therapies to treat metastatic pancreatic cancer in the second line, considering as efficacy measures overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS). Published randomized trials were identified using electronic databases (MEDLINE, PubMed, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ and American Society of clinical oncology). 8 studies met the inclusion criteria for a total of 1,587 patients and 7 different therapeutic schemes. The results suggested that the use of IRI-FP-Folinic Acid scheme in the second-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer may offer a benefit in terms of OS and PFS for patients not previously treated with these drugs.

Prospective analysis of different combined regimens of stereotactic body radiation therapy and chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer

To identify impacts of different combined regimens of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) and chemotherapy on survival of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) and factors correlated with determinations of different combinations. Four hundred and nineteen patients with radiographically and biopsy-proven LAPC were prospectively enrolled. Factors associated with different strategies were analyzed with Chi-square test and contingency coefficients. Cox regression was used to identify factors predictive of survival. Prognostic values of different multimodality were further analyzed by propensity score-matched analysis. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) of all patients was 13.2 and 8.2 months, respectively. Baseline ECOG correlated with induction chemotherapy, while tumor stage, lymph node invasion, and toxicity after SBRT associated with adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with induction chemotherapy alone (12.2 months), adjuvant chemotherapy alone (13.6 months), and induction and adjuvant chemotherapy (13.3 months) had longer OS than those without chemotherapy (11.2 months; P < .001), while adjuvant chemotherapy alone and induction and adjuvant chemotherapy increased PFS. An adjusted overall survival benefit was gained with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with induction and adjuvant chemotherapy (OS: 14.7 months [95% CI: 14.2-15.2 months] vs 13.1 months [95% CI: 12.3-13.9 months]; P < .001) (PFS: 8.8 months [95% CI: 8.4-9.2 months] vs 8.1 months [95% CI: 7.4-8.8 months]; P = .053). Induction and adjuvant chemotherapy, especially adjuvant chemotherapy, plus SBRT may improve OS and PFS. Baseline performance status, tumor stage, lymph node involvement, and toxicity after SBRT influenced determinations of upfront multimodality.

S-1 induced discoid lupus erythematosus-like lesions and long-term complete response for para-aortic lymph node recurrence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a case report

Background

Metastatic recurrence after resection of pancreatic cancer is considered to be an incurable disease, and discoid lupus erythematosus (DLE)-like lesions are known as a side effect of fluorouracil agents. We report a very rare case of metastatic recurrence of pancreatic cancer in a Japanese man with DLE-like lesions in which long-term complete response was achieved through S-1 monotherapy.

Case presentation

A 65-year-old man who had undergone distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy for pancreatic body cancer and had received adjuvant gemcitabine developed postoperative para-aortic lymph node recurrence 17 months after surgery. S-1 monotherapy was started. About 2 weeks after starting this treatment, he developed an erythematous rash on the face and scalp. DLE was diagnosed by skin biopsy. The eruptions were aggravated by the administration of S-1 and improved during periods of respite from S-1. Yet as CA19-9 was reduced by almost half 1 month after starting S-1 chemotherapy, S-1 chemotherapy was continued at a reduced dose. CA19-9 decreased to within a normal range within 6 months after starting S-1 chemotherapy, and a reduction in lymph node metastasis was detected through imaging. The patient is still alive without recurrence or metastasis 113 months after surgery.

Conclusions

Even in patients with S-1-induced DLE-like lesions, continuation of S-1 is possible if the dose and duration of S-1 are appropriately regulated and medical therapy is administered for the skin lesions. Further investigation into the possible correlation between skin rash and clinical benefit in connection with S-1 is strongly warranted.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy plus induction or adjuvant chemotherapy for early stage but medically inoperable pancreatic cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis of a prospectively collected database

Background

To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plus induction chemotherapy and SBRT plus adjuvant therapy.

Methods

Patients with radiographically resectable, biopsy-proven pancreatic cancer were enrolled. Data were prospectively collected from 2012 to 2016. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify factors predictive of survival. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of SBRT combined with different timing of chemotherapy.

Results

One hundred patients were enrolled with 48 receiving induction chemotherapy and 52 undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 17.5 months (95% CI: 15.8–19.2 months) and 13.7 months (95% CI: 12.3–15.1 months), respectively. Patients with adjuvant chemotherapy (P <0.001), CA19-9 response (P <0.001) and BED₁₀ (biological effective dose, α/β = 10) ≥ 60 Gy (P = 0.024) had a longer OS, while the former two correlated with PFS. Patients with more positive factors had a superior OS and PFS. After propensity score matching analysis, there were 23 patients from each group included in the analysis. Longer OS (23.1 months versus 15.6, P <0.001) and PFS (18.0 months versus 11.6 months, P <0.001) were found in patients with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with those with induction chemotherapy.

Conclusion

SBRT was safe and effective in early stage pancreatic cancer. Combined with adjuvant chemotherapy, SBRT could be an alternative for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer but not eligible for surgical resection.

Combination of Pre-Treatment DWI-Signal Intensity and S-1 Treatment: A Predictor of Survival in Patients with Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy and Sequential S-1

OBJECTIVE: To identify whether the combination of pre-treatment radiological and clinical factors can predict the overall survival (OS) in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) treated with stereotactic body radiation and sequential S-1 (a prodrug of 5-FU combined with two modulators) therapy with improved accuracy compared with that of established clinical and radiologic risk models. METHODS: Patients admitted with LAPC underwent diffusion weighted imaging (DWI) scan at 3.0-T (b = 600 s/mm²). The mean signal intensity (SI_b = 600) of region-of-interest (ROI) was measured. The Log-rank test was done for tumor location, biliary stent, S-1, and other treatments and the Cox regression analysis was done to identify independent prognostic factors for OS. Prediction error curves (PEC) were used to assess potential errors in prediction of survival. The accuracy of prediction was evaluated by Integrated Brier Score (IBS) and C index. RESULTS: 41 patients were included in this study. The median OS was 11.7 months (2.8-23.23 months). The 1-year OS was 46%. Multivariate analysis showed that pre-treatment SI_b = 600 value and administration of S-1 were independent predictors for OS. The performance of pre-treatment SI_b = 600 and S-1 treatment in combination was better than that of SI_b = 600 or S-1 treatment alone. CONCLUSION: The combination of pre-treatment SI_b = 600 and S-1 treatment could predict the OS in patients with LAPC undergoing SBRT and sequential S-1 therapy with improved accuracy compared with that of established clinical and radiologic risk models.

Novel agents for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: emerging therapeutics and future directions

A poor prognosis of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) associated with chemoresistance has not changed for the past three decades. A multidisciplinary diagnosis followed by surgery and chemo(radiation)therapy is the main treatment approach. However, gemcitabine- and 5-fluorouracil-based therapies did not present satisfying outcomes. Novel regimens targeting pancreatic cancer cells, the tumor microenvironment, and immunosuppression are emerging. Biomarkers concerning the treatment outcome and patient selection are being discovered in preclinical or clinical studies. Combination therapies of classic chemotherapeutic drugs and novel agents or novel therapeutic combinations might bring hope to the dismal prognosis for PDAC patients.

Dendritic Cell/Cytokine-Induced Killer Cell Immunotherapy Combined with S-1 in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Prospective Study

Purpose: Advanced pancreatic cancer has remained challenging to treat effectively. This study aimed to investigate the clinical effects and safety of immunotherapy with dendritic cells and cytokine-induced killer cells (DC-CIK) administered with the chemotherapy (CT) S-1 in this malignancy.Experimental Design: Consecutive patients (n = 47) with advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with either DC-CIK + S-1, DC-CIK alone, S-1 alone, or best supportive care.Results: DC-CIK plus S-1 produced significantly longer median OS and PFS (212 and 136 days) compared with DC-CIK (128 and 85 days), CT (141 and 92 days), or supportive care only (52 and 43 days; P < 0.001). After adjusting for competing risk factors, DC-CIK combined with S-1 and receipt of 2 or more cycles of DC-CIK treatment remained independent predictors of disease-free and overall survival (P < 0.05). Phenotypic analysis of PBMCs demonstrated that the CD3⁺, CD3⁺/CD4⁺, and CD8⁺/CD28⁺ T-cell subsets were elevated (P < 0.05), while the CD3⁺/CD8⁺, CD3⁺/CD16⁺/CD56⁺ and CD4⁺/CD25⁺ cell subsets were significantly decreased after DC-CIK cell therapy (P < 0.05). There were no grade 3 or 4 toxicities. In addition, the mutational frequency in cell-free tumor DNA (cfDNA) declined in 4 of 14 patients who received DC-CIK, and was associated with a more favorable survival.Conclusions: Treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer with combined DC-CIK infusions and S-1 was safe, resulted in favorable PFS and OS, and modulated the peripheral blood immune repertoire. Clin Cancer Res; 23(17); 5066-73. ©2017 AACR.

Effect of FOLFIRINOX as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy failure

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity, and efficacy of second-line chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX after gemcitabine (GEM)-based chemotherapy failure in metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC).

METHODS

We studied 18 histopathologically proven MPC patients. The schedule was 85 mg/m oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and 400 mg/m leucovorin, followed by 400 mg/m 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) as a bolus on day 1 and 2400 mg/m 5-FU as a 46-hour continuous infusion biweekly. The dose of irinotecan was defined as follows: level 0: 100 mg/m, level 1: 125 mg/m, level 2: 150 mg/m, and level 3: 180 mg/m. The doses of other drugs were fixed. The primary endpoint of phase II study was the response rate (RR).

RESULTS

We initially evaluated 6 patients in a phase I study. One patient developed neutropenia and 1 patient developed hyperglycemia and severe infection. Accordingly, level 1 was chosen as the MTD. According to a phase II study, the RR was 22.2% and the disease control rate was 61.1%. The progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.8 (range, 0.7-19.1) and 9.8 (2.4-19.8) months, respectively. The most common severe adverse event was neutropenia (66.7%). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 1 (5.6%) case.

CONCLUSION

The recommended dose was 85 mg/m oxaliplatin, 100 mg/m irinotecan, and 400 mg/m leucovorin, followed by 400 mg/m 5-FU as a bolus on day 1 and 2400 mg/m 5-FU as a 46-hour continuous infusion. These results indicate that second-line FOLFIRINOX is a marginally effective treatment for GEM-based chemotherapy failure cases.

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.

Randomised phase II trial of irinotecan plus S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer

Background:

We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of irinotecan/S-1 (IRIS) therapy with S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

Methods:

Patients were treated with oral S-1 (80–120 mg for 14 days every 4 weeks) plus intravenous irinotecan (100 mg m⁻² on days 1 and 15 every 4 weeks; IRIS group) or oral S-1 group (80–120 mg daily for 28 days every 6 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).

Results:

Of 137 patients enrolled, 127 were eligible for efficacy. The median PFS in the IRIS group and S-1 monotherapy group were 3.5 and 1.9 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR)=0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53–1.11; P=0.18), while the median overall survival (OS) were 6.8 and 5.8 months, respectively (HR=0.75; 95% CI, 0.51–1.09; P=0.13). Response rate was significantly higher in the IRIS group than in the S-1 monotherapy group (18.3% vs 6.0%, P=0.03). Grade 3 or higher neutropenia and anorexia occurred more frequently in the IRIS group.

Conclusions:

There was a trend for better PFS and OS in the IRIS group that could be a treatment arm in the clinical trials for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

Safety and efficacy of stereotactic body radiation therapy combined with S-1 simultaneously followed by sequential S-1 as an initial treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SILAPANC) trial: study design and rationale of a phase II clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Upfront surgeries are not beneficial to most patients with pancreatic cancer. Therefore, more emphasis has been placed chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer recently. Gemcitabine-based regimens or FOLFIRINOX (a chemotherapy regimen including leucovorin, 5-FU, irinotecan, oxaliplatin) has been proven as a standard chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer. However, severe toxicities may prevent the completion of chemotherapy. S-1 has showed better objective response rates, similar overall survival rates and progression-free survival rates compared with gemcitabine, revealing that S-1 may be a potential candidate in treating pancreatic cancer, especially for patients refractory to gemcitabine. Additionally, stereotactic body radiation therapy with Cyberknife could provide better efficacy than conventional radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Therefore, Cyberknife with S-1 simultaneously followed by sequential S-1 as an initial treatment may bring about favourable outcomes but needs further studies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The S-1 as an initial treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SILAPANC) trial is a prospective, single-centre, one armed ongoing study. 190 eligible patients are required to initially receive Cyberknife with 1 cycle of S-1 simultaneously. After the concurrent chemoradiotherapy, 2 or 3 cycles of S-1 are sequentially given. Doses and fractions depend on the locations and volumes of tumours and the adjacent organs at risk. S-1 is taken orally, 2 times a day, at a dose of 80 mg/m² for 28 days, followed by a 14-day interval. The primary objectives are overall survival and 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 4-year and 5-year overall survival rates. The secondary objectives are cancer-specific survival, progression-free survival, time to progression, local control rates, clinical benefit rates, radiation-induced acute and late toxicities, adverse effects of chemotherapy and quality of life of patients. Besides, variables most predictive of prognosis would be identified via multivariate methods.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approvals have been granted by the Changhai Hospital Ethics Committee (CHEC-2016-032-01). The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02704143; Pre-results.

Therapeutic efficacy and safety of S-1-based combination therapy compare with S-1 monotherapy following gemcitabine failure in pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis

S-1 monotherapy is widely used following gemcitabine failure in pancreatic cancer, especially in East Asia. We performed a meta-analysis to determine whether S-1-based combination therapy had better efficacy and safety compared with S-1 monotherapy. We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane CENTRAL and subsequently included five trials with a total of 690 patients. The combined hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio; the corresponding 95% confidence intervals of progression-free survival, overall survival, and overall response rate; and grade 3–4 adverse events were examined. Five randomized controlled trials were included. Meta-analysis demonstrated S-1-based combination therapy significantly increased progression-free survival (HR = 0.78, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.67–0.90, p = 0.0009) and overall response rate (HR = 1.74, 95% CI: 1.20–2.52, p = 0.003). Evidence was insufficient to confirm that S-1-based combined regimens improved overall survival (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.75–1.00, p = 0.05). There was no significant difference in adverse events between the two treatment arms. In conclusion, S-1-based combination therapy improved progression-free survival and overall response rate compared to S-1 monotherapy with acceptable toxicity.

Duodenal stenting followed by systemic chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic cancer and gastric outlet obstruction

OBJECTIVES

Endoscopic duodenal stenting has recently been proposed as a substitute for surgical gastrojejunostomy for the treatment of gastric outlet obstruction. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duodenal stenting followed by systemic chemotherapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer with gastric outlet obstruction.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective cohort study, conducted at an academic medical center, of 71 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and gastric outlet obstruction (mean age: 67.6 years; range: 31-92 years) who underwent duodenal stenting with or without subsequent chemotherapy. Overall survival, duration of oral intake of foods, the rate of introduction of chemotherapy, progression-free survival, and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

Stent placement was technically successful in 69 (97%) patients. Thirty-six (51%) patients were treated with chemotherapy: 17 with gemcitabine alone, 15 with S-1 alone, 3 with FOLFIRINOX, and 1 with paclitaxel. Median progression-free survival and overall survival after chemotherapy were 2.6 months (95% confidence interval: 1.3-3.9 months) and 4.7 months (95% confidence interval: 2.6-6.8 months), respectively. Cases of grade 3 anemia were frequently observed during chemotherapies following duodenal stenting (32%). Tumor stage, performance status, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, and introduction of chemotherapy were independent prognostic factors for survival (hazard ratios of 3.73, 2.21, 2.69, and 1.85 with p-values of <0.001, 0.010, <0.001, and 0.045, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this study suggest that endoscopic duodenal stenting is an advantageous treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer patients with gastric outlet obstruction regarding its safety and smooth conduction of subsequent chemotherapies.

Intravenous and intraperitoneal paclitaxel with S-1 for treatment of refractory pancreatic cancer with malignant ascites

Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous and intraperitoneal paclitaxel (PTX) combined with S-1 for treatment of gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer with malignant ascites. Methods After the feasibility of this regimen was first confirmed in an interim analysis in 10 patients, a total of 35 patients were enrolled between April 2011 and December 2014. PTX was administered intravenously (50 mg/m(2)) and intraperitoneally (20 mg/m(2)) on days 1 and 8, and 80 mg/m(2) S-1 was administered on days 1-14 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), the objective tumor response, efficacy against malignant ascites, and safety. Result In all 35 patients, the median OS and PFS were 4.8 (95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.1-5.3) months and 2.8 (95 % CI, 0.9-4.1) months, respectively. The 26 patients who were evaluable for efficacy achieved a response rate of 8 % and a disease control rate of 69 %. Malignant ascites had disappeared or decreased in 18 (69 %) patients, including complete resolution in 4 (15 %), and a negative change in cytological status was achieved in 8 (31 %) patients. The major grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia (34 %), anemia (31 %), nausea (9 %), and catheter-related infections (6 %). Conclusion Combination chemotherapy consisting of intravenous and intraperitoneal PTX with S-1 showed acceptable toxicity and favorable efficacy in pancreatic cancer patients with malignant ascites. (

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

UMIN000005306).

A randomized phase II study of S-1 plus oral leucovorin versus S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

This is the first phase II trial in which adding oral leucovorin (LV) to S-1 (SL) significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) when compared with S-1 monotherapy (S) in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). The significantly better PFS and disease control rate with SL than with S suggest that the antitumor activity of S-1 is enhanced by LV in advanced PC.

Background

We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of adding oral leucovorin (LV) to S-1 when compared with S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer (PC).

Patients and methods

Gemcitabine-refractory PC patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive S-1 at 40, 50, or 60 mg according to body surface area plus LV 25 mg, both given orally twice daily for 1 week, repeated every 2 weeks (SL group), or S-1 monotherapy at the same dose as the SL group for 4 weeks, repeated every 6 weeks (S-1 group). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

Among 142 patients enrolled, 140 were eligible for efficacy assessment (SL: n = 69 and S-1: n = 71). PFS was significantly longer in the SL group than in the S-1 group [median PFS, 3.8 versus 2.7 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37–0.85; P = 0.003]). The disease control rate was significantly higher in the SL group than in the S-1 group (91% versus 72%; P = 0.004). Overall survival (OS) was similar in both groups (median OS, 6.3 versus 6.1 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54–1.22; P = 0.463). After adjusting for patient background factors in a multivariate analysis, OS tended to be better in the SL group (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47–1.07; P = 0.099). Both treatments were well tolerated, although gastrointestinal toxicities were slightly more severe in the SL group.

Conclusion

The addition of LV to S-1 significantly improved PFS in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced PC, and a phase III trial has been initiated in a similar setting.

Clinical trials number

Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center: JapicCTI-111554.

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.

Recent advances for the treatment of pancreatic and biliary tract cancer after first-line treatment failure

Here, we evaluate clinical trials on chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic or biliary tract cancer after first-line treatment failure. Clinical trials on conventional and innovative medical treatments for progressive pancreatic and biliary cancer were analyzed. Metronomic chemotherapy, which consists of the administration of continuative low-dose of anticancer drugs, was also considered. A significant extension of overall survival was achieved with second-line, regimens in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer. Moreover, many Phase II studies, including chemotherapy and target molecules and immunotherapy, have reported promising results, in both pancreatic and biliary cancer. However, data in these patients' setting are very heterogeneous, and only few randomized studies are available.

Randomised phase II trial of S-1 plus oxaliplatin vs S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer

Background:

This randomised, open-label, multicenter phase II study compared progression-free survival (PFS) of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) with that of S-1 alone in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

Methods:

Patients with confirmed progressive disease following the first-line treatment with a gemcitabine-based regimen were randomised to receive either S-1 (80/100/120 mg day⁻¹ based on body surface area (BSA), orally, days 1–28, every 6 weeks) or SOX (S-1 80/100/120 mg day⁻¹ based on BSA, orally, days 1–14, plus oxaliplatin 100 mg m⁻², intravenously, day 1, every 3 weeks). The primary end point was PFS.

Results:

Between January 2009 and July 2010, 271 patients were randomly allocated to either S-1 (n=135) or SOX (n=136). Median PFS for S-1 and SOX were 2.8 and 3.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR)=0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65–1.08; stratified log-rank test P=0.18). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.9 vs 7.4 months (HR=1.03; 95% CI, 0.79–1.34; stratified log-rank test P=0.82). The response rate (RR) was 11.5% vs 20.9% (P=0.04). The major grade 3/4 toxicities (S-1 and SOX) were neutropenia (11.4% and 8.1%), thrombocytopenia (4.5% and 10.3%) and anorexia (12.9% and 14.7%).

Conclusions:

Although SOX showed an advantage in RR, it provided no significant improvement in PFS or OS compared with S-1 alone.

S-1 in the treatment of pancreatic cancer

S-1 is an oral 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) prodrug, which is designed to improve the antitumor activity of 5-FU by inhibiting dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, the key enzyme of 5-FU catabolism. Recently, two important studies on the clinical use of S-1 for pancreatic cancer have been reported from Japan. In the first study (GEST study), S-1 demonstrated non-inferiority to gemcitabine (GEM) in overall survival (OS) for metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic cancer, but combination chemotherapy with GEM and S-1 did not show superiority to GEM in OS. In the second study (JASPAC-01 study), S-1 showed superiority to adjuvant chemotherapy with GEM in OS in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. In addition to GEM, S-1 is now regarded as the key drug in the management of pancreatic cancer in Japan. To date, many studies have investigated the effectiveness of S-1 in various settings, such as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic cancer, second-line chemotherapy after GEM failure, and chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced disease. In this review, we focus on recent clinical trials of S-1-based chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.

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.

Randomized controlled study of gemcitabine plus S-1 combination chemotherapy versus gemcitabine for unresectable pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) combination chemotherapy in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive GS (oral S-1 60 mg/m(2) daily on days 1-15 every 3 weeks and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 8 and 15) or gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients were randomly assigned. PFS was significantly longer in the GS arm with an estimated hazard ratio (HR) of 0.65 (95 % CI 0.43-0.98; P = 0.039; median 5.3 vs 3.8 months). Objective response rate (ORR) was also better in the GS arm (21.6 vs 6 %, P = 0.048). Median survival was 8.6 months for GS and 8.6 months for GEM (HR 0.93; 95 % CI 0.61-1.41; P = 0.714). Grade 3-4 neutropenia (44 vs 19.6 %, P = 0.011) and thrombocytopenia (26 vs 8.7 %, P = 0.051) were more frequent in the GS arm.

CONCLUSIONS

GS therapy improved PFS and ORR with acceptable toxicity profile in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.