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

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.

Prognostic analysis and outcomes of metastatic pancreatic cancer patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as second or later-line treatment

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) first-line therapy often consists of polychemotherapy regimens, but choosing a second-line therapy after disease progression, especially following first-line FOLFIRINOX, remains a clinical challenge. This study presents results from a large, multicenter, retrospective analysis of Italian patients with metastatic PC (mPC) treated with Nab-paclitaxel/Gemcitabine (AG) as second or later line of treatment. Main objective of the study is to identify prognostic factors that could inform treatment decisions.

METHODS

The study included 160 mPC patients treated with AG in 17 Italian institutions. AG was administered according to labelling dose, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient refusal. Variations in schedules, dose modifications, supportive measures, and response evaluation were determined by individual clinicians' practice.

RESULTS

AG was well-tolerated and exhibited promising clinical activity. The overall response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) were 22.5% and 45.6%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.9 and 6.8 months, respectively. Among the patients who received AG as a second-line therapy (n = 111, 66.9%), median PFS and OS were 4.2 and 7.4 months, respectively. Notably, in the 76 patients (68%) receiving AG after first-line FOLFIRINOX, an ORR of 19.7% and a DCR of 46.0% were observed, resulting in a median PFS of 3.5 and median OS of 5.7 months. The study identified specific clinical or laboratory parameters (LDH, NLR, fasting serum glucose, liver metastases, ECOG PS, and first-line PFS) as independent prognostic factors at multivariate level. These factors were used to create a prognostic nomogram that divided patients into three risk classes, helping to predict second-line OS and PFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the largest real-world population of mPC patients treated with AG as a second or later line of therapy. It supports the feasibility of this regimen following first-line FOLFIRINOX, particularly in patients with specific clinical and laboratory characteristics who derived prolonged benefit from first-line therapy.

Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Current Evidence

Chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy has revolutionized the treatment of malignant and non-malignant disorders. CARs are synthetic transmembrane receptors expressed on genetically modified immune effector cells, including T cells, natural killer (NK) cells, or macrophages, which are able to recognize specific surface antigens on target cells and eliminate them. CAR-modified immune cells mediate cytotoxic antitumor effects via numerous mechanisms, including the perforin and granzyme pathway, Fas and Fas Ligand (FasL) pathway, and cytokine secretion. High hopes are associated with the prospective use of the CAR-T strategy against solid cancers, especially the ones resistant to standard oncological therapies, such as pancreatic cancer (PC). Herein, we summarize the current pre-clinical and clinical studies evaluating potential tumor-associated antigens (TAA), CAR-T cell toxicities, and their efficacy in PC.

Systematic Review of Single-Agent vs. Multi-Agent Chemotherapy for Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma in Elderly vs. Younger Patients

PURPOSE

To systematically review all studies comparing multi-agent to single-agent chemotherapy in the first and second-line setting for unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, so as to compare the outcomes of young and elderly patients.

METHODS

This review searched three databases for relevant studies. The inclusion criteria were diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, comparison of an elderly versus young population, comparison of single-agent versus multi-agent chemotherapy, data on survival outcomes, and randomised controlled trials. The exclusion criteria were phase I trials, incomplete studies, retrospective analyses, systematic reviews, and case reports. A meta-analysis was performed on second-line chemotherapy in elderly patients.

RESULTS

Six articles were included in this systematic review. Three of these studies explored first-line treatment and three explored second-line treatment. In the subgroup analysis, the meta-analysis showed statistically improved overall survival for elderly patients receiving single-agent second-line treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review confirmed that combination chemotherapy improved survival in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, regardless of age. The benefit of combination chemotherapy in second-line studies for elderly patients with advanced pancreas cancer was less clear.

Efficacy and tolerance of LV5FU2-carboplatin chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after failure of standard regimens

Background:

Chemotherapy options in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after failure of standard chemotherapies are limited.

Objectives:

We aimed to report the efficacy and safety of the leucovorin and 5-fluorouracil (LV5FU2) and carboplatin combination in this setting.

Design:

We performed a retrospective study including consecutive patients with advanced PDAC who received LV5FU2–carboplatin between 2009 and 2021 in an expert center.

Methods:

We measured overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), and explored associated factors using Cox proportional hazard models.

Results:

In all, 91 patients were included (55% male, median age 62), with a performance status of 0/1 in 74% of cases. LV5FU2–carboplatin was mainly used in third (59.3%) or fourth line (23.1%), with three (interquartile range: 2.0–6.0) cycles administered on average. The clinical benefit rate was 25.2%. Median PFS was 2.7 months (95% CI: 2.4–3.0). At multivariable analysis, no extrahepatic metastases (p = 0.083), no ascites or opioid-requiring pain (p = 0.023), <2 prior treatment lines (p < 0.001), full dose of carboplatin (p = 0.004), and treatment initiation >18 months after initial diagnosis (p < 0.001) were associated with longer PFS. Median OS was 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.48–4.92) and was influenced by the presence of extrahepatic metastases (p = 0.058), opioid-requiring pain or ascites (p = 0.039), and number of prior treatment lines (0.065). Prior tumor response under oxaliplatin did not impact either PFS or OS. Worsening of preexisting residual neurotoxicity was infrequent (13.2%). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events were neutropenia (24.7%) and thrombocytopenia (11.8%).

Conclusion:

Although the efficacy of LV5FU2–carboplatin appears limited in patients with pretreated advanced PDAC, it may be beneficial in selected patients.

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).

Moving the Needle on Precision Medicine in Pancreatic Cancer

The management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has posed a considerable challenge for decades, with incidence and mortality rates almost mirroring each other. Despite this, a deeper understanding of the complex biology inherent to PDAC has provided a roadmap for a more precise approach to treatment. PDAC deficient in homologous recombination repair and mismatch repair is a subgroup that should be identified in the clinic for a targeted approach. In addition, KRAS wild-type PDAC, occurring in approximately 10% of patients, is enriched in highly actionable alterations including fusions, underscoring the importance of integrative germline and somatic sequencing. Comprehensive sequencing efforts over the past decade have documented genomic- and transcriptomic-based classifiers, with the latter emerging as two main subtypes: the classical and basal-like, which are now being evaluated in clinical trials. Together with promising, innovative strategies to target KRAS mutations and their pleotropic effects, a new era of precision medicine in PDAC is on the horizon.

Systemic therapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs)-basis and current status

A major shift in the approach to the management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs) has been the recognition of the systemic nature of the disease even in clinically and radiologically limited disease stages. The recalcitrant nature of PDAC is intrinsically related to the lack of therapeutic targets and dense surrounding stroma that limits the activity of currently available chemotherapeutic options. However, research is increasingly focusing on intensifying systemic management options in PDAC, resulting in gradual improvements in survival. Currently effective chemotherapeutic regimens like modified 5-fluorouracil-leucovorin-irinotecan-oxaliplatin and gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel have improved outcomes in resectable and advanced PDAC. An increasing use of these regimens has also resulted in greater conversion of borderline resectable and locally advanced cancers to resection, though the most effective approach in this subgroup is yet to be identified. The current review presents an outline of the basic systemic nature of PDAC and current options of systemic therapy, predominantly chemotherapy .

Current and emerging therapeutic strategies in pancreatic cancer: Challenges and opportunities

Pancreatic carcinoma (PC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths worldwide. Despite early detection and advances in therapeutics, the prognosis remains dismal. The outcome and therapeutic approach are dependent on the stage of PC at the time of diagnosis. The standard of care is surgery, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The advent of newer drugs has changed the landscape of adjuvant therapy. Moreover, recent trials have highlighted the role of neoadjuvant therapy and chemoradiotherapy for resectable and borderline resectable PC. As we progress towards a better understanding of tumor biology, genetics, and microenvironment, novel therapeutic strategies and targeted agents are now on the horizon. We have described the current and emerging therapeutic strategies in PC.

The clinical outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a retrospective analysis

Background

Despite recent advances in first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer, standard treatment after the failure of initial chemotherapy has not been established. Hence, we aimed to retrospectively analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

Methods

We reviewed the clinical data of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who underwent palliative chemotherapy at Kosin University Gospel Hospital between January 2013 and October 2020.

Results

Among 366 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had received palliative chemotherapy, 104 (28.4%) underwent at least one cycle of second-line chemotherapy. The median age of the patients at the time of initiating second-line treatment was 62 years (interquartile range, 57–62 years), and 58.7% (61 patients) of them were male. The common second-line chemotherapy regimens were 5-fluorouracil (FU) plus leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (33 patients, 31.7%); gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (29, 27.9%), gemcitabine±erlotinib (13, 12.5%); and oxaliplatin and 5-FU/leucovorin (12, 11.5%). The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were 6.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5–8.6 months) and 4.5 months (95% CI, 2.7–6.3 months), respectively. In a multivariate analysis, poor performance status (PS) (hazard ratio [HR], 2.247; p=0.021), metastatic disease (HR, 2.745; p=0.011), and elevated carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels (HR, 1.939; p=0.030) at the beginning of second-line chemotherapy were associated with poor OS.

Conclusion

The survival outcome of second-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer remains poor. However, PS, disease extent (locally advanced or metastatic), and CEA level may help determine patients who could benefit from second-line treatment.

Prognostic Significance of Disease Control at 12 Weeks in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Receiving FOLFIRINOX as First-line Chemotherapy

OBJECTIVES

The POLO (Pancreas Cancer Olaparib Ongoing) trial demonstrated improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) with olaparib maintenance in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations who had disease control after 16 weeks of platinum-based first-line therapy. However, in the real-world, the first assessment is usually performed at 12 weeks. Therefore, this study aimed to identify the proportion of real-world patients with APC that have disease control at 12 weeks (DC12) after FOLFIRINOX, assess any associations of baseline variables with DC12, and to determine the effect of DC12 on PFS and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

APC patients treated with first-line FOLFIRINOX from 2011 to 2018 in Alberta, Canada, were identified. We conducted an analysis of baseline characteristics to identify factors associated with DC12 and to compare the PFS and OS of patients with DC12 to those with earlier disease progression.

RESULTS

We identified 165 APC patients treated with FOLFIRINOX with unknown BRCA1/2 status, of which 56% were men, and the median age at diagnosis was 59 years (interquartile range, 38 to 75 y). Of these, 72 (44%) had DC12. Lower serum carbohydrate antigen 19.9 and normal serum albumin were associated with a higher likelihood of DC12. The PFS and OS of patients with DC12 was significantly higher than those with earlier progression (9.3 vs. 2.5 mo; hazard ratio, 0.22; 95% confidence interval, 0.15-0.32; P<0.001; 21.6 vs. 8.9 mo; hazard ratio, 0.35; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-0.49; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Less than half of real-world patients treated with first-line FOLFIRINOX have DC12. Patients with APC who have higher carbohydrate antigen 19.9 and low albumin are less likely to have DC12. DC12 is significantly associated with longer PFS and OS.

Systemic therapy in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: current practice and perspectives

Major breakthroughs have been achieved in the management of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil + irinotecan + oxaliplatin) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel approved as a first-line therapy, although the prognosis is still poor. At progression, patients who maintain a good performance status (PS) can benefit from second-line chemotherapy. To address the concern of achieving tumor control while maintaining a good quality of life, maintenance therapy is a concept that has now emerged. After a FOLFIRINOX induction treatment, maintenance with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) seems to offer a promising approach. Although not confirmed in large, prospective trials, gemcitabine alone as a maintenance therapy following induction treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel could be an option, while a small subset of patients with a germline mutation of breast cancer gene (BRCA) can benefit from the polyadenosine diphosphate-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib. The rate of PDAC with molecular alterations that could lead to a specific therapy is up to 25%. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently approved larotrectinib for patients with any tumors harboring a neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) gene fusion, and pembrolizumab for patients with a mismatch repair deficiency in a second-line setting, including PDAC. Research focused on targeted therapy and immunotherapy is active and could improve patients' outcomes in the near future.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Beyond first line, where are we?

Pancreatic cancer is considered one of the most aggressive cancers, with an increasing incidence in recent years. To date, chemotherapy is still the standard of care for advanced metastatic disease, unfortunately providing only a slight advantage in terms of survival. The molecular and cellular characteristics of pancreatic cancer cells, as well as the cells that characterize the pancreatic tumour microenvironment, are the basis of the mechanisms of resistance to treatment. After progression during first-line treatment, few patients are eligible for second-line treatment due to the loss of performance status. To date, a clear survival advantage has not yet been demonstrated for second-line chemotherapy. Precision medicine could be the key to increasing responses to cancer treatment and finally impacting survival in this difficult-to-treat disease. In this review, we analyze current recommendations in the second-line setting and potential future prospects.

Contemporary management of pancreas cancer in older people

As the population of western countries is aging, the number of patients diagnosed with cancer is growing. Therefore older people, more susceptible to develop pancreatic malignancy, will likely represent the prototype of a pancreatic cancer patient in the near future. Diagnostic modalities utilised for younger patients are also applicable for older individuals. There is accumulative evidence that biological age is not an independent factor predicting poor outcome in elderly patients with resectable disease undergoing surgery, however increased postoperative morbidity and mortality within the elderly group has also been reported. Adjuvant chemotherapy should be offered in all patients with good performance status regardless of their age. Palliative measures for unresectable tumours including relief from biliary and duodenal obstruction as well as chemotherapy should be considered in non-frail patients with reasonable life expectancy. Palliative chemotherapy options are FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel for patients with good performance status (0-1) and gemcitabine alone for patients with performance status 2-3. The cornerstone for improving the outcomes of the elderly age group is careful patient selection and perioperative optimization of those who have indication for surgery. Patients and their carers should be involved in the decision making process with emphasis on the expected functional recovery after the proposed treatment modality. The presence of geriatricians in the multidisciplinary team meetings is crucial in order to identify the optimal treatment pathway for elderly patients. Geriatric input regarding peri-habilitation pathways to improve surgical outcomes, to decrease mortality and to expedite patients' functional recovery is highly recommended.

Real World Evidence on Second-Line Palliative Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Background: The outcome and tolerability of palliative second line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) in real life patients are largely unknown. Prognostic parameters for risk stratification and treatment guidance are lacking.

Materials and Methods: A population based multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted, covering all APC patients who received palliative second-line chemotherapy between 2011 and 2018 at any cancer center in the South East Region of Sweden. Primary outcome was overall survival after second-line therapy (OS2). Time to treatment failure after second-line therapy (TTF2), hematological toxicity, and unplanned hospitalizations were key secondary outcomes. A number of baseline potentially prognostic parameters were assessed.

Results: A total of 509 patients received first-line palliative chemotherapy, and of these 167 (33%) received at least one dose of second-line therapy and formed the final study population. Median OS2 was 5.2 months (95% CI = 4.7–5.7) and median TTF2 was 1.9 months (1.5–2.2). OS2 and TTF2 were similar regardless regimen, including comparison of the two most common regimens (fluoropyrimidine monotherapy vs. fluoropyrimidine/oxaliplatin doublet). Multivariate analysis revealed that normal plasma albumin (≥35) and serum CA-19-9 above median (>1,550) were independent predictors for OS2 (HR = 0.21, p < 0.001 and HR = 2.03, p = 0.009) and TTF2 (HR = 0.22, p < 0.001 and HR = 2.03, p = 0.01), while ECOG performance status >1 was predictive for TTF2 (HR = 2.05, p = 0.032). Grade 3–4 hematological toxicity was registered in 17 patients (10%). 50 (30%) had at least one event of hospitalization.

Conclusion: The real world outcome of second line palliative chemotherapy for refractory APC remains dismal. Baseline plasma albumin, serum CA-19-9, and performance status emerge as key prognostic factors, and should be further studied as tools for individualized treatment decisions.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diagnosis, Treatment and Follow-Up of Exocrine Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Evidence Evaluation and Recommendations by the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM)

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in women (7%) and the sixth in men (5%) in Italy, with a life expectancy of around 5% at 5 years. From 2010, the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (AIOM) developed national guidelines for several cancers. In this report, we report a summary of clinical recommendations of diagnosis, treatment and follow-up of PDAC, which may guide physicians in their current practice. A panel of AIOM experts in upper gastrointestinal cancer malignancies discussed the available scientific evidence supporting the clinical recommendations.

FOLFIRINOX for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Patients After Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine Failure

OBJECTIVES

There is no standard chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) after gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GP) failure. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRINOX (5-Fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) (5-Fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) (FFX) and modified FFX (mFFX) for APC patients after GP failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy and safety of FFX in APC patients who were refractory or intolerant of GP.

RESULTS

Between July 2014 and October 2018, 23 patients received FFX after failure of GP. The overall response rate (RR) was 23%, and the disease control rate (DCR) was 68%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 5.3 months (95% confidence interval, 2.5-8.9), and the median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months (95% confidence interval, 4.0-14.2). Twelve patients received FFX, and 11 patients received mFFX. In the FFX group, the RR was 9%, the DCR was 73%, the PFS was 5.3 months, and the OS was 6.9 months. In the mFFX group, the RR was 23%, the DCR was 64%, the PFS was 4.3 months, and the OS was 12.8 months. There was no significant difference between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

FOLFIRINOX has potential activity for patients with APC in whom GP failed.

Sequential Treatment of Metastatic Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreatic Duct with Liver Metastasis Following the NAPOLI-1 Study Protocol with nal-Irinotecan plus 5-FU in the Second Line

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is typically diagnosed at an advanced or metastatic stage, when curative surgery is not recommended. Therefore, the prognosis is poor for this dismal disease, with only 1-2% of the patients reaching the 5-year survival follow-up. Current advances in systemic treatment with gemcitabine regimens, specifically polychemotherapy with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or other multidrug regimens such as FOLFIRINOX in the first line, have improved disease control over time. This higher efficacy of systemic treatment enables metastatic PDAC patients to receive second-line treatment more often nowadays. Currently, there is only one regimen for second-line treatment approved by the EMA, FDA, and Swissmedic, based on the phase III NAPOLI-1 study. In this case report, we present an outstanding response to sequential treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel followed by second-line treatment with nal-irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil.

Outcomes and Characteristics of Patients Receiving Second-line Therapy for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

There is limited randomized data to guide second-line chemotherapy selection in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). We aimed to characterize predictors and outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with APC.

METHODS

We identified all patients with APC [locally advanced (LAPC) or metastatic (MPC)] who received ≥1 cycle of first-line chemotherapy between January 2012 and December 2015 across 6 cancer centers in British Columbia, Canada. Baseline characteristics and survival outcomes were summarized.

RESULTS

Of 676 patients with APC (31% LAPC, 69% MPC) who received ≥1 cycle of chemotherapy, 164 (24%) received second-line chemotherapy. These patients were younger, with lower ECOG and higher CA19-9 at presentation, compared with patients who did not receive second-line chemotherapy. There were no differences in rates of second-line chemotherapy between LAPC and MPC (28% vs. 23%; P=0.18). Only first-line FOLFIRINOX was associated with second-line chemotherapy. Median overall survival (OS) from second-line chemotherapy was longer with second-line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel than fluoropyrimidine or gemcitabine (7.9 vs. 5.1 vs. 4.3 mo; P=0.008). On multivariable analysis, longer OS from second-line chemotherapy was associated with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, lower ECOG, and LAPC.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based cohort, first-line FOLFIRINOX was the strongest predictor of second-line chemotherapy. Duration of therapy remains short and novel treatments are urgently needed.

An update on treatment options for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal solid organ tumors. Due to the rising incidence, late diagnosis, and limited treatment options, it is expected to be the second leading cause of cancer deaths in high income countries in the next decade. The multidisciplinary treatment of this disease depends on the stage of cancer at diagnosis (resectable, borderline, locally advanced, and metastatic disease), and combines surgery, chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and supportive care. The landscape of multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer treatment is changing rapidly, especially in locally advanced disease, and the number of treatment options in metastatic disease, including personalized medicine, innovative targets, immunotherapy, therapeutic vaccines, adoptive T-cell transfer, or stemness inhibitors, will probably expand in the near future. This review summarizes the current literature and provides an overview of how new therapies or new therapeutic strategies (neoadjuvant therapies, conversion surgery) will guide multidisciplinary disease management, future clinical trials, and, hopefully, will increase overall survival.

Spotlight on liposomal irinotecan for metastatic pancreatic cancer: patient selection and perspectives

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease, where the mortality closely matches increasing incidence. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common histologic type that tends to metastasize early in tumor progression. For metastatic PDAC, gemcitabine had been the mainstay treatment for the past three decades. The treatment landscape has changed since 2010, and current first-line chemotherapy includes triplet drugs like FOLFIRINOX (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin), and doublet agents like nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine. Nanoliposomal encapsulated irinotecan (nal-IRI) was developed as a novel formulation to improve drug delivery, effectiveness, and limit toxicities. Nal-IRI, in combination with leucovorin-modulated fluorouracil (5-FU/LV), was found in a large randomized phase III clinical trial (NAPOLI-1) to significantly improve overall survival in patients who progressed on gemcitabine-based therapy. This review will focus on the value of using nal-IRI, toxicities, recent clinical experiences, and tools to improve patient outcomes in this setting.

NAPOLI-1 phase 3 study of liposomal irinotecan in metastatic pancreatic cancer: Final overall survival analysis and characteristics of long-term survivors

BACKGROUND

Liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) is approved for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. This approval was based on significantly improved median overall survival compared with 5-FU/LV alone (6.1 vs 4.2 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.67) in the global phase 3 NAPOLI-1 trial. Here, we report the final survival analysis and baseline characteristics associated with long-term survivors (survival of ≥1 year) in the NAPOLI-1 trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with mPDAC were randomised to receive nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV (n = 117), nal-IRI (n = 151), or 5-FU/LV (n = 149) for the first 4 weeks of 6-week cycles. Baseline characteristics and efficacy in the overall population were compared with those in patients who survived ≥1 year. Through 16th November 2015, 382 overall survival events had occurred.

RESULTS

The overall survival advantage for nal-IRI+5-FU/LV vs 5-FU/LV was maintained from the original nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid in metastatic pancreatic cancer after previous gemcitabine-based therapy (NAPOLI-1) analysis (6.2 vs 4.2 months, respectively; HR, 0.75; 95% confidence interval: 0.57-0.99). Median progression-free survival, objective response rate and disease control rate also favoured nal-IRI+5-FU/LV therapy. Estimated one-year overall survival rates were 26% with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV and 16% with 5-FU/LV. Baseline characteristics associated with long-term survival in the nal-IRI+5-FU/LV arm were Karnofsky performance status ≥90, age ≤65 years, lower CA19-9 levels, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≤5 and no liver metastases. No new safety concerns were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival benefits of nal-IRI+5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV were maintained over an extended follow-up, and prognostic markers of survival ≥1 year were identified.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01494506.

Multicenter phase II trial of modified FOLFIRINOX in gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line treatment for gemcitabine (GEM)-refractory unresectable pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

This study was a prospective, multicenter, one-arm, open-label, phase II trial. Patients with unresectable PC, who showed disease progression during GEM-based chemotherapy were enrolled. All patients were administered FOLFIRINOX with reduced irinotecan and oxaliplatin (RIO; irinotecan 120 mg/m² and oxaliplatin 60 mg/m²), which was set according to the phase I study of FOLFIRINOX. The objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events were evaluated. Additionally, changes in quality of life (QoL) were assessed using a questionnaire on QoL.

RESULTS

Between August 2015 and May 2016, a total of 48 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up time was 259 d with a median of 8.5 cycles. The ORR and DCR were 18.8% and 62.5%, respectively, including one patient who showed complete remission. The median PFS was 5.8 mo [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.7-7.9] and median OS was 9.0 mo (95%CI: 6.4-11.6). Neutropenia (64.6%) was the most common grade 3-4 adverse event, followed by febrile neutropenia (16.7%). Although 14.6% of patients experienced grade 3 fatigue, most non-hematologic AEs were under grade 2. In the QoL analysis, the global health status score before treatment was not different from the score at the last visit after treatment (45.43 ± 22.88 vs 48.66 ± 24.14, P = 0.548).

CONCLUSION

FOLFIRINOX with RIO showed acceptable toxicity and promising efficacy for GEM-refractory unresectable PC. However, this treatment requires careful observation of treatment-related hematologic toxicities.

Harnessing the Immune System in Pancreatic Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Managing patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDA) is a challenging proposition for any treating oncologist. Although the potency of first-line therapies has improved with the approvals of FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, many patients are unable to derive significant benefit from later lines of therapy upon progression. Enrollment on clinical trials remains among the best options for patients with mPDA in all lines of therapy. At our institution, we routinely check for microsatellite instability (MSI-H) and perform next-generation sequencing (NGS) at the time of diagnosis in all good performance status mPDA patients. Although MSI-H status is only found in 1% of patients with mPDA, given pembrolizumab's tissue-agnostic approval for MSI-H tumors in later-line settings, it is a viable option when deciding on subsequent lines of therapy. Any use of immune therapy in mPDA is investigational outside the MSI-H setting. NGS can identify BRCA or other DNA damage response (DDR) defects in patients which can predict sensitivity to platinum-based therapies and influence choice of both initial and later lines of therapy. It can also identify rare actionable genomic alterations such as HER2 (2%) and TRK fusions (0.1%) and offer patients the option of enrollment on clinical trials with agents targeting these or other identified alterations. We believe enrolling mPDA patients on clinical trials with immune-modulating agents is critical to determine if there are other patient subsets, outside of the MSI-H setting, who would benefit from these approaches. Immunotherapy's general tolerability and potential to generate durable responses make it particularly appealing for mPDA patients. Although single-modality immunotherapy such as checkpoint inhibitors or vaccines have not demonstrated efficacy in this disease, combinatorial strategies targeting unique aspects of PDA including the tumor microenvironment and desmoplastic stroma have shown preclinical or early-phase success. Validating these treatments with later-phase prospective studies is essential to making immunotherapy a routine component of the treatment armamentarium for mPDA patients.

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: diagnosis and treatment with a view to the future

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is a lethal disease with a poor 5-year survival. Systemic treatments can be used to control symptoms and prolong life. Cytotoxic chemotherapies are commonly administered, with combination treatments, such as fluorouracil, folinic acid, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) or nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine showing the largest clinical benefits. Newer genomic classifications of PDAC may provide a rationale for targeted therapies or immunotherapies, although at present these remain largely experimental. This review discusses the evidence behind the currently used regimens, while introducing the potential future of pancreatic cancer care.

Attenuated FOLFIRINOX in the salvage treatment of gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase II study

Background

Combination therapy with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) chemotherapy drastically improves survival of advanced pancreatic cancer patients. However, the efficacy of FOLFIRINOX as a second-line treatment after gemcitabine failure has not been tested prospectively. We investigated the feasibility and safety of attenuated FOLFIRINOX in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

Methods

A multicenter phase II prospective open-label, single-arm study was conducted at 14 hospitals. Patients with histologically proven invasive ductal pancreatic adenocarcinoma, a measurable or evaluable lesion, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1, adequate organ function, and aged 19 years or older were eligible. Attenuated FOLFIRINOX consisted of oxaliplatin 65 mg/m², irinotecan 135 mg/m², and leucovorin 400 mg/m² injected intravenously on day 1 and 5-fluorouracil 2000 mg/m² continuously infused intravenously over 46 h on days 1–2, repeated every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival from the initiation of FOLFIRINOX. Secondary endpoints were the objective response rate, disease control rate, overall survival, safety, and tolerability. We estimated overall survival and progression-free survival using the Kaplan–Meier methods.

Results

We enrolled 39 patients from 14 institutions. The objective response rate was 10.3%, while the disease control rate was 64.1%. The 6-month and 1-year overall survival rates were 59.0% and 15.4%, respectively. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 3.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.5–6.0 months) and 8.5 months (95% CI 5.6–11.4 months), respectively. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (41.0%), nausea (10.3%), anorexia (10.3%), anemia (7.7%), mucositis (7.7%), pneumonia/pleural effusion (5.1%), and fatigue (5.1%). One treatment-related death attributable to septic shock occurred.

Conclusion

Attenuated FOLFIRINOX may be promising as a second-line therapy for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

Therapeutic developments in pancreatic cancer: current and future perspectives

The overall 5-year survival for pancreatic cancer has changed little over the past few decades, and pancreatic cancer is predicted to be the second leading cause of cancer-related mortality in the next decade in Western countries. The past few years, however, have seen improvements in first-line and second-line palliative therapies and considerable progress in increasing survival with adjuvant treatment. The use of biomarkers to help define treatment and the potential of neoadjuvant therapies also offer opportunities to improve outcomes. This Review brings together information on achievements to date, what is working currently and where successes are likely to be achieved in the future. Furthermore, we address the questions of how we should approach the development of pancreatic cancer treatments, including those for patients with metastatic, locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, as well as for patients with resected tumours. In addition to embracing newer strategies comprising genomics, stromal therapies and immunotherapies, conventional approaches using chemotherapy and radiotherapy still offer considerable prospects for greater traction and synergy with evolving concepts.

Rucaparib Monotherapy in Patients With Pancreatic Cancer and a Known Deleterious BRCA Mutation

Purpose

Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis and limited treatment options. Approximately 9% of pancreatic cancers harbor a germline or somatic BRCA1 or BRCA2 (BRCA1/2) mutation. Because poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors have significant activity in BRCA1/2-mutant ovarian and breast cancers, RUCAPANC investigated the efficacy and safety of rucaparib in BRCA1/2-mutant pancreatic cancer.

Patients and Methods

RUCAPANC enrolled patients with measurable locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer who had received one to two prior chemotherapy regimens. Patients received oral rucaparib (600 mg twice daily) until disease progression. The primary end point was objective response rate.

Results

Nineteen patients were enrolled. Sixteen of 19 BRCA1/2 mutations were germ-line; three were somatic. Patients had received a median of two prior chemotherapy regimens. Four patients achieved a response; two partial responses and one complete response (CR) were confirmed (objective response rate, 15.8%; 3 of 19), with an additional CR unconfirmed. The disease control rate (CR, partial response, or stable disease for ≥ 12 weeks) was 31.6% (6 of 19) in all patients and 44.4% (4 of 9) in those who had received one prior chemotherapy regimen. As prespecified in the protocol, enrollment was stopped because of an insufficient response rate among the first 15 patients. Treatment-emergent adverse events included nausea (63.2%) and anemia (47.4%). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events included anemia (31.6%), fatigue (15.8%), and ascites (15.8%). Secondary resistance mutations were detected in circulating free tumor DNA in two patients with a germline BRCA2 mutation. These mutations are predicted to lead to the reversion of a somatic-not germline-mutation.

Conclusion

Rucaparib provided clinical benefit to patients with advanced pancreatic cancer and a BRCA1/2 mutation, and demonstrated an acceptable safety profile. Additional trials of rucaparib in this population are warranted.

From First Line to Sequential Treatment in the Management of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

The current management of patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is based on systemic chemotherapy. The results of the MPACT and PRODIGE clinical trials have demonstrated that the combination of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine (GEM) as well as FOLFIRINOX regimen result in improvement in overall survival when compared to GEM alone. Treatment guidelines now recommend either one of these two regimens as first line treatment for fit patients with mPDAC. Because no head-to-head comparison between the two regimens exists, the selection of one versus the other is based on clinical criteria. The design and eligibility criteria of these two clinical trials are dissimilar, making the results of the MPACT trial more applicable to the general population of patients with mPDAC. In addition, the combination of nab-paclitaxel and GEM is better tolerated and easier to administer in clinical practice than FOLFIRINOX. Furthermore, when the regimens are studied in comparable patient populations the efficacy results are very similar. Nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5FU has recently demonstrated a significant increase in efficacy rates after a GEM-based treatment. Importantly, treatment of mPDAC should now be considered as a continuum care for patients who are fit, with second and even third line treatments. Different sequential treatment algorithms are proposed based on available data. In retrospective studies, patients who were managed with GEM-based regimens followed by fluoropyrimidine-based regimens appear to have the most favorable outcome.

Tumor-reducing effect of the clinically used drug clofazimine in a SCID mouse model of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) represents the most common form of pancreatic cancer with rising incidence in developing countries. Unfortunately, the overall 5-year survival rate is still less than 5%. The most frequent oncogenic mutations in PDAC are loss-of function mutations in p53 and gain-of-function mutations in KRAS. Here we show that clofazimine (Lamprene), a drug already used in the clinic for autoimmune diseases and leprosy, is able to efficiently kill in vitro five different PDAC cell lines harboring p53 mutations. We provide evidence that clofazimine induces apoptosis in PDAC cells with an EC₅₀ in the μM range via its specific inhibitory action on the potassium channel Kv1.3. Intraperitoneal injection of clofazimine resulted in its accumulation in the pancreas of mice 8 hours after administration. Using an orthotopic PDAC xenotransplantation model in SCID beige mouse, we show that clofazimine significantly and strongly reduced the primary tumor weight. Thus, our work identifies clofazimine as a promising therapeutic agent against PDAC and further highlights ion channels as possible oncological targets.

Outcomes with second-line chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancers: A retrospective study from a tertiary cancer center in India

INTRODUCTION

Approximately 40% of patients receiving first-line chemotherapy (CT1) for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PDACs) receive second-line chemotherapy (CT2). The most appropriate regimen to be used has not been identified, and data regarding CT2 in advanced PDAC from India are scarce.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of advanced PDAC patients who were evaluated during the period of August 2013 to August 2016 in the Department of GI medical Oncology, at Tata Memorial Hospital was conducted. Patients with histologically proven PDAC and started on CT2 postprogression or recurrence after CT1 were included for analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients received CT1 in the period of study, of which 76 patients (39.66%) received CT2. The median age of patients was 59.5 years (range: 38-82), majority were male (69.7%), and 14 patients (18.4%) had undergone curative pancreatic resection at baseline. The common regimens used as CT2 were modified 5 fluorouracil/leucovorin/irinotecan (mFOLFIRI) (35.5%), gemcitabine-nab paclitaxel (18.4%), and gemcitabine-erlotinib (11.8%). Common grade 3/4 toxicities noted were fatigue (10.3%), anemia (10.3%), neutropenia (7.4%), and vomiting (7.4%). Dose reductions were required in 32.9% of patients. RR, DCR, median event free survival, and median overall survival were 21.1%, 48.7%, and 5.94 months (95% confidence intervals [CI]: 4.68-7.20) and 8.08 months (95% CI: 7.11-9.07) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

CT2 in advanced PDAC appears feasible in the Indian setting if the patients are appropriately selected and they can be treated with acceptable toxicities and reasonable outcomes.

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Over the past few decades, many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review attempts to synthesise all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making when dealing with this difficult disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both for first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival, while secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, grade 3/4 adverse events, therapy response and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL (searched 14 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 14 June 2017), MEDLINE (1946 to 14 June 2017) and CANCERLIT (1999 to 2002) databases. We also handsearched all relevant conference abstracts published up until 14 June 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised studies assessing overall survival outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy, alone or in combination, were the eligible treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently analysed studies, and a third settled any disputes. We extracted data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL), and we assessed risk of bias for each study.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 studies addressing chemotherapy in 9463 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We did not identify any eligible studies on radiotherapy.We did not find any benefit for chemotherapy over best supportive care. However, two identified studies did not have sufficient data to be included in the analysis, and many of the chemotherapy regimens studied were outdated.Compared to gemcitabine alone, participants receiving 5FU had worse OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.92) and QoL. On the other hand, two studies showed FOLFIRINOX was better than gemcitabine for OS (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.57) and response rates (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.65), but it increased the rate of side effects. The studies evaluating CO-101, ZD9331 and exatecan did not show benefit or harm when compared with gemcitabine alone.Giving gemcitabine at a fixed dose rate improved OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94, high-quality evidence) but increased the rate of side effects when compared with bolus dosing.When comparing gemcitabine combinations to gemcitabine alone, gemcitabine plus platinum improved PFS (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95) and response rates (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98) but not OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08, low-quality evidence). The rate of side effects increased. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improved OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95), PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87) and response rates (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.47, high-quality evidence), but it also increased side effects. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitor did not improve survival outcomes but did increase toxicity. One study demonstrated that gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel improved OS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.84, high-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82) and response rates (RR 3.29, 95% CI 2.24 to 4.84) but increased side effects. Gemcitabine-containing multi-drug combinations (GEMOXEL or cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU/gemcitabine) improved OS (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, low-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) and QOL.We did not find any survival advantages when comparing 5FU combinations to 5FU alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination chemotherapy has recently overtaken the long-standing gemcitabine as the standard of care. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are highly efficacious, but our analysis shows that other combination regimens also offer a benefit. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individual patients still remains difficult, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to help rationalise treatment selection for patients.

Towards an optimal treatment algorithm for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA)

Chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (pda). Two randomized trials have demonstrated superiority of the combination regimens folfirinox (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel over gemcitabine monotherapy as a first-line treatment in adequately fit subjects. Selected pda patients progressing to first-line therapy can receive secondline treatment with moderate clinical benefit. Nevertheless, the optimal algorithm and the role of combination therapy in second-line are still unclear. Published second-line pda clinical trials enrolled patients progressing to gemcitabine-based therapies in use before the approval of nab-paclitaxel and folfirinox. The evolving scenario in second-line may affect the choice of the first-line treatment. For example, nanoliposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluouracil and leucovorin is a novel second-line option which will be suitable only for patients progressing to gemcitabine-based therapy. Therefore, clinical judgement and appropriate patient selection remain key elements in treatment decision. In this review, we aim to illustrate currently available options and define a possible algorithm to guide treatment choice. Future clinical trials taking into account sequential treatment as a new paradigm in pda will help define a standard algorithm.

Current challenges in optimizing systemic therapy for patients with pancreatic cancer: expert perspectives from the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) with invited international faculty

INTRODUCTION

Despite recent progress, the outlook for most patients with pancreatic cancer remains poor. There is variation in how patients are managed globally due to differing interpretations of the evidence, partly because studies in this disease are challenging to undertake. This article collates the evidence upon which current best practice is based and offers an expert opinion from an international faculty on how latest developments should influence current treatment paradigms. Areas covered: Optimal chemotherapy for first and subsequent lines of therapy; optimal management of locally advanced, non-metastatic cancer including the role of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy, current evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy, major advances in pancreatic cancer genomics and challenges in supportive care particularly relevant to patients with pancreatic cancer. For each section, literature was reviewed by comprehensive search techniques, including clinical trial websites and abstracts from international cancer meetings. Expert commentary: For each section, a commentary is provided. Overall the challenges identified were: difficulties in diagnosing pancreatic cancer early, challenges for performing randomised clinical trials in all stages of the disease, some progress in systemic therapy with new agents and in identifying molecular subtypes that may be clinically relevant and move towards personalized therapy, but still, pancreatic cancer remains a very poor prognosis cancer with significant palliative care needs.

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.

Post-gemcitabine therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer - A comparative review of randomized trials evaluating oxaliplatin- and/or irinotecan-containing regimens

A systematic review and critical evaluation of randomized trial evidence for oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-containing regimens in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine has not yet been published. We conducted a comparative systematic review of randomized trials evaluating oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based therapies in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine to assess trial similarity and the feasibility of performing an indirect treatment comparison (ITC). Studies were identified through PubMed and key oncology conference abstracts. The following trials met our criteria: NAPOLI-1 (nanoliposomal irinotecan [nal-IRI] or nal-IRI+5-fluorouracil [5-FU]/leucovorin [LV] vs 5-FU/LV), CONKO-003 (oxaliplatin+5-FU/LV [OFF] vs 5-FU/LV), PANCREOX (oxaliplatin+5-FU/LV [mFOLFOX6] vs 5-FU/LV), and Yoo et al. (2009) (irinotecan+5-FU/LV [mFOLFIRI3] vs mFOLFOX). Fundamental differences were identified in study design (i.e., number of study sites, number of countries), patient (i.e., locally advanced vs metastatic disease, stratification variables, prior and subsequent treatments) and treatment (i.e., regimens, dose intensity) characteristics, and primary and secondary outcomes (i.e., primary vs secondary outcomes, overall survival [OS], progression-free survival [PFS]) among the 4 included trials. Our comparative review demonstrated significant dissimilarity across trials, which precluded conducting an ITC. In the absence of head-to-head nal-IRI- and/or oxaliplatin-based therapy trials, clinicians are advised to interpret these studies separately within the context of their individual patient population.