Maintenance sunitinib or observation in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase II randomised trial

Maintenance Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer, a New Approach Based on the Synergy between the Novel Agent GP-2250 (Misetionamide) and Gemcitabine

The novel Oxathiazinane derivative GP-2250 (Misetionamide) displays antineoplastic activity in vitro and in vivo, as previously shown in pancreatic cancer cells and in patient-derived mouse xenografts (PDX). Currently, GP 2250 is under phase I clinical trial in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). GP-2250 in combination with Gemcitabine displays a high synergistic capacity in various primary and established pancreatic cancer cell lines. Additionally, in the eight PDX models tested, the drug combination was superior in reducing tumor volume with an aggregate tumor regression (ATR) of 74% compared to Gemcitabine alone (ATR: 10%). Similarly, in a PDX maintenance setting following two weeks of treatment with nab-Paclitaxel plus Gemcitabine, the combination of GP-2250 plus Gemcitabine resulted in outstanding tumor control (ATR: 79%) compared to treatment with Gemcitabine alone (ATR: 60%). Furthermore, GP-2250 reduced the ratio of tumor-initiating CD133+ markers on the surface of PDAC cells in spheroid cultures, indicating a possible mechanism for the synergistic effect of both substances. Considering the high tolerability of GP 2250, these results may open up a new approach to maintenance therapy with GP-2250/Gemcitabine combination following nab-Paclitaxel plus Gemcitabine as first-line treatment.

Exploring external validity of chemotherapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in real life

INTRODUCTION

Cisplatin, nab-paclitaxel, capecitabine, and gemcitabine (PAXG) regimen activity was assessed in a single institution phase II trial (PACT-19) on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The PACT-31 study explored the external validity of PACT-19 results.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged ≥18 and ≤75 years with KPS ≥70, and PDAC diagnosis receiving PAXG in the participating institutions were eligible and categorized as follows: A) PACT-19; B) PACT-31-HSR; C) PACT-31-non-HSR. With a sample of 175 patients, assuming a target 1-year overall survival of 60 % for metastatic and of 80 % for non-metastatic patients, the trial will be considered successful with the 1-year OS falling into the 95 % CI.

RESULTS

Data from 68 PACT-19 and 168 PACT-31 patients were retrieved. After 124 events, 1yOS was 52.5 % (95 %CI: 44.6-60.4 %) for metastatic and 80.5 % (95 %CI: 71.9-89.1 %) for non-metastatic patients. Survival overlapped between PACT-19 and PACT-31-HSR (median 17.6 and 17.4 months, p = 0.21) and was significantly shorter in PACT-31-non-HSR (median 11.3 months; p = 0.03). Differences of dose-intensity, use of maintenance therapy, and treatment after progression between PACT-31-HSR and non-HSR were evidenced.

DISCUSSION

PACT-19 results have external validity. The outcome difference between HSR and non-HSR centers endorses the need of creating a hub-and-spoke network aimed at sharing the expertise on rare-diseases.

Clinical and Preclinical Targeting of Oncogenic Pathways in PDAC: Targeted Therapeutic Approaches for the Deadliest Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. It is commonly diagnosed in advanced stages and therapeutic interventions are typically constrained to systemic chemotherapy, which yields only modest clinical outcomes. In this review, we examine recent developments in targeted therapy tailored to address distinct molecular pathway alteration required for PDAC. Our review delineates the principal signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms implicated in the initiation and progression of PDAC. Subsequently, we provide an overview of prevailing guidelines, ongoing investigations, and prospective research trajectories related to targeted therapeutic interventions, drawing insights from randomized clinical trials and other pertinent studies. This review focus on a comprehensive examination of preclinical and clinical data substantiating the efficacy of these therapeutic modalities, emphasizing the potential of combinatorial regimens and novel therapies to enhance the quality of life for individuals afflicted with PDAC. Lastly, the review delves into the contemporary application and ongoing research endeavors concerning targeted therapy for PDAC. This synthesis serves to bridge the molecular elucidation of PDAC with its clinical implications, the evolution of innovative therapeutic strategies, and the changing landscape of treatment approaches.

Cyclophosphamide maintenance to extend combination chemotherapy-free interval in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Administering chemotherapy until progression to metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients lacks of supporting evidence and causes cumulative toxicity. We explored the role of cyclophosphamide as maintenance therapy.

METHODS

PDAC germline BRCA1-2 wild-type patients who were progression-free after ≥6 months of any regimen and line of chemotherapy and received maintenance cyclophosphamide (mCTX) (50 mg/day), were included in the analysis.

RESULTS

42 patients were included in the analysis. Thirty-nine patients had progression of disease. Median PFS was 3.5 (range 1.0-31+) months. PFS rates at 6 and 12 months were 26.2% and 11.9%. At a median follow-up of 20.0 months (range 12.1-31.0 months), 20 patients died and 22 are alive. Median OS was 20.0 months (range 2.2-31.0+). OS at 6 and 12 months was 97.6% (95%CI: 93.4-100), and 73.8% (95% CI: 61.1-86.5), respectively. Only 2 patients receiving mCTX had Grade 3 toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

mCTX therapy yielded promising PFS and OS outcome in PDAC patients who were progression-free after induction chemotherapy, with unremarkable toxicity. Accordingly, this approach warrants further investigation.

Angiogenesis and Pancreatic Cancer: Novel Approaches to Overcome Treatment Resistance

Pancreatic cancer (PCa) is acknowledged as a significant contributor to global cancer- related mortality and is widely recognized as one of the most challenging malignant diseases to treat. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which is the most common type of PCa, is highly aggressive and is mostly incurable. The poor prognosis of this neoplasm is exacerbated by the prevalence of angiogenic molecules, which contribute to stromal stiffness and immune escape. PDAC overexpresses various proangiogenic proteins, including vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-A, and the levels of these molecules correlate with poor prognosis and treatment resistance. Moreover, VEGF-targeting anti-angiogenesis treatments are associated with the onset of resistance due to the development of hypoxia, which in turn induces the production of angiogenic molecules. Furthermore, excessive angiogenesis is one of the hallmarks of the second most common form of PCa, namely, pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET). In this review, the role of angiogenesis regulators in promoting disease progression in PCa, and the impact of these molecules on resistance to gemcitabine and various therapies against PCa are discussed. Finally, the use of anti-angiogenic agents in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted therapeutic molecules is discussed as a novel solution to overcome current treatment limitations in PCa.

Maintenance Treatment for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Balancing Therapeutic Intensity with Tolerable Toxicity

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is typically treated with multi-agent chemotherapy until disease progression or intolerable cumulative toxicity. For patients whose disease shows ongoing control or response beyond a certain timeframe (≥3-4 months), options include pausing chemotherapy with close monitoring or de-escalating to maintenance therapy with the goal of prolonging progression-free and overall survival while preserving quality of life. There is currently no universally accepted standard of care and a relative dearth of randomized clinical trials in the maintenance setting. Conceptually, such therapy can entail continuing the least toxic components of a first-line regimen and/or introducing novel agent(s) such as the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib, which is presently the only approved drug for maintenance treatment and is limited to a genetically defined subset of patients. In addition to identifying new therapeutic candidates and combinations in the maintenance setting, including targeted agents and immunotherapies, future research should focus on better understanding this unique biologic niche and how treatment in the maintenance setting may be distinct from resistant/refractory disease; identifying molecular predictors for more effective pairing of specific treatments with patients most likely to benefit; and establishing patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials to ensure accurate capture of quality of life metrics.

Advancements in Systemic Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Outcomes for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer have improved in the past 12 years, mainly because of progress made in systemic therapies. New treatment strategies for advanced pancreatic cancer include switch maintenance with cytotoxic therapies, induction maintenance, and the utilization of targeted agents for patients with actionable variants, as well as ongoing development of cytotoxic regimens, such as NALIRIFOX. The activity of immunotherapy has been disappointing to date, but novel combinations and identifying appropriate patient populations may further unlock its potential.

Systemic oncological treatments in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a scoping review and evidence map

PURPOSE

To identify, describe, and organise currently available evidence regarding systemic oncological treatments (SOTs) (chemotherapy, targeted/biological therapies, and immunotherapy) compared to best supportive care (BSC) for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review and evidence mapping, adhering to PRISMA-ScR checklist. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Epistemonikos, PROSPERO, and clinicaltrials.gov for eligible studies. We included systematic reviews (SRs), randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, and observational studies evaluating SOTs compared to BSC or no treatment in patients with advanced PC. Two independent reviewers performed the screening process and data extraction. We developed evidence maps as an interactive visualization display, including the assessed interventions and outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 50,601 records obtained from our search, we included 43 studies: 2 SRs, 16 RCTs, 4 quasi-experimental studies, 20 observational studies, and 1 protocol for a quasi-experimental study. Forty-two studies reported survival-related outcomes and most favoured SOTs, while five reported toxicity and most favoured BSC. Other patient-centred outcomes, such as quality of life, were scarcely reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the current evidence gaps in studies assessing treatments for patients with advanced PC, mainly the lack of reports of non-survival-related outcomes, pointing out research areas that need further attention to make better recommendations for these patients.

Maintenance therapy of low-dose nivolumab, S-1, and leucovorin in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma with a germline mutation of MSH6: A case report

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) provide substantial benefits to a small subset of patients with advanced cancer with mismatch repair deficiency (MMRD) or microsatellite instability (MSI), including patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the long duration of ICI treatment presents a considerable financial burden. We present the case of a 63-year-old woman with metastatic PDAC refractory to conventional chemotherapy. Genetic analyses identified an MSH6 germline mutation and a high tumor mutation burden (TMB). Complete response (CR) was achieved after a short course of low-dose nivolumab (20 mg once every 2 weeks) with chemotherapy. CR was maintained for over 1 year with low-dose nivolumab and de-escalated chemotherapy without any immune-related adverse events. This case supports the further exploration of low-dose, affordable ICI-containing regimens in patients with advanced MSI-high/TMB-high cancer.

Pharmacotherapeutic options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal malignancy projected to be the 2^nd leading cause of cancer related death in the USA by 2030. This manuscript discusses current and evolving treatment approaches in patients with pancreatic cancer.

AREAS COVERED

PDAC is classified as: a) resectable, b) borderline resectable, c) unresectable (locally advanced and metastatic). The standard of care for patients who present with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma is six months of adjuvant modified (m) FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine plus capecitabine, or single agent gemcitabine. For many reasons, there has been a paradigm shift to employing neoadjuvant chemotherapy. For resectable and borderline resectable patients, we generally start with systemic therapy and reevaluate resectability with subsequent scans specifically when the tumor is located in the head or body of the pancreas. Combined chemoradiation therapy can be employed in select patients. The standard of care for metastatic PDAC is FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel. Germline and somatic genomic profiling should be obtained in all patients. Patients with a germline BRCA mutation can receive upfront gemcitabine and cisplatin.

EXPERT OPINION

Thorough understanding of molecular pathogenesis in PDAC has opened various therapeutic avenues. We remain optimistic that future treatment modalities such as targeted therapies, cellular therapies and immunotherapy will further improve survival in PDAC.

Niraparib plus nivolumab or niraparib plus ipilimumab in patients with platinum-sensitive advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised, phase 1b/2 trial

BACKGROUND

Establishing alternatives to lifelong chemotherapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has been proposed to address chemotherapy resistance and cumulative toxicity. Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have shown efficacy in this setting, and concurrent immune checkpoint blockade could offer synergistic tumour control. The aim of this study was to test the safety and antitumour activity of maintenance with PARP inhibition combined with immune checkpoint blockade in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had a stable response to platinum-based chemotherapy.

METHODS

We conducted an open-label, randomised, phase 1b/2 study of niraparib plus anti-PD-1 (nivolumab) or anti-CTLA-4 (ipilimumab) therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer whose cancer had not progressed after at least 16 weeks of platinum-based therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via permuted block randomisation (block sizes 2 and 4) to niraparib 200 mg orally per day plus either nivolumab 240 mg intravenously every 2 weeks (later changed to 480 mg intravenously every 4 weeks based on manufacturer update) or ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously every 4 weeks for four doses. The primary endpoints were safety and progression-free survival at 6 months. Treatment groups were not compared for activity, which was assessed in each group against a clinically meaningful progression-free survival at 6 months of 44% (null hypothesis). Superiority of a treatment regimen could be declared if 6-month progression-free survival was 60%, and inferiority if 6-month progression-free survival was 27%. All patients who received at least one dose of study treatment and had at least one post-treatment assessment of response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1 were included in the efficacy population. The safety population consisted of all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03404960, and enrolment is completed and follow-up is ongoing.

FINDINGS

91 patients were enrolled between Feb 7, 2018, and Oct 5, 2021 and were randomly assigned to niraparib plus nivolumab (n=46) or niraparib plus ipilimumab (n=45). Of these patients, 84 were evaluable for the progression-free survival endpoint (niraparib plus nivolumab=44; niraparib plus ipilimumab=40). Median follow-up was 23·0 months (IQR 15·0-31·5). 6-month progression-free survival was 20·6% (95% CI 8·3-32·9; p=0·0002 vs the null hypothesis of 44%) in the niraparib plus nivolumab group; and 59·6% (44·3-74·9; p=0·045) in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group. Ten (22%) of 46 patients in the niraparib plus nivolumab group and 23 (50%) of 45 patients in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group had a grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse event. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the niraparib plus nivolumab group were hypertension (in four [8%] patients), anaemia (two [4%]), and thrombocytopenia (two [4%]) whereas in the niraparib plus ipilimumab group these were fatigue (in six [14%]), anaemia (five [11%]), and hypertension (four [9%]). There were no treatment-related deaths.

INTERPRETATION

The primary endpoint of 6-month progression-free survival was met in the niraparib plus ipilimumab maintenance group, whereas niraparib plus nivolumab yielded inferior progression-free survival. These findings highlight the potential for non-cytotoxic maintenance therapies in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, the Basser Center Young Leadership Council, The Konner Foundation, The Pearl and Philip Basser Innovation Research Award, the Anonymous Foundation, and the US National Institutes of Health.

Systemic Therapy of Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Current Status, Challenges, and Opportunities

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy characterized by nonspecific presenting symptoms, lack of a screening test, rapidly progressive clinical course, and presentation with an advanced-stage disease in the majority of patients. PDAC is essentially a systemic disease irrespective of the initial stage, as most patients with non-metastatic PDAC undergoing curative-intent treatment eventually experience metastatic relapse. Currently, cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment in patients with advanced disease. However, the current standard treatment with multiagent chemotherapy has modest efficacy and results in median overall survival (OS) of less than a year and a 5-year OS of about 10%. The pathobiology of PDAC poses many challenges, including a unique tumor microenvironment interfering with drug delivery, intratumoral heterogeneity, and a strongly immunosuppressive microenvironment that supports cancer growth. Recent research is exploring a wide range of novel therapeutic targets, including genomic alterations, tumor microenvironment, and tumor metabolism. The rapid evolution of tumor genome sequencing technologies paves the way for personalized, targeted therapies. The present review summarizes the current chemotherapeutic treatment paradigm of advanced PDAC and discusses the evolving novel targets that are being investigated in a myriad of clinical trials.

S-1 Maintenance Therapy After First-Line Treatment With Nab-Paclitaxel Plus S-1 for Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Real-World Study

Background

In our previous phase II study, nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (NPS) showed encouraging objective response rate (ORR) as first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (APAC). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of S-1 maintenance after NPS in APAC and to explore factors predicting survival benefits when using S-1 maintenance.

Methods

Between 2014 and 2018 a total of 182 patients with APAC, who were primarily treated with NPS, were included. For patients without progression or with treatment discontinuation due to any reasons within 4 months during NPS treatment, S-1 monotherapy was administrable as maintenance therapy at the physicians’ discretion based on the patients’ preference and performance status. Efficacy and safety of S-1 maintenance were investigated.

Results

In 123 patients without progression within 4 months during NPS treatment, 74 received S-1 maintenance and had median progression-free survival of 9.6 months and median overall survival of 16.7 months. Multivariable analysis showed that in patients receiving S-1 maintenance after first-line NPS therapy, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance Status score of 0, non-metastatic disease, and complete or partial response as best response to NPS chemotherapy were independently associated with better survival. The most common all-grade hematological and non-hematological adverse events were neutropenia (82.4%) and peripheral neurotoxicity (66.2%), respectively, and the most common ≥Grade 3 hematological and non-hematological adverse events were neutropenia (40.5%) and peripheral neurotoxicity (6.8%), respectively in patients who received S-1 maintenance.

Conclusions

Our real-world study showed that S-1 maintenance after tumor response or stable disease induced by first-line NPS treatment was effective and well-tolerated for some patients with APAC, which offers a promising alternative treatment strategy with encouraging survival for APAC.

Case Report: Maintenance Nivolumab in Complete Responder After Multimodality Therapy in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Maintenance therapy is rarely considered in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We describe the case of a 57-year-old man with metastatic PDAC treated with an initially full but subsequently de-escalated dose of combination chemotherapy due to intolerance to neurotoxicity. After a complete response to combined radiofrequency ablation for the liver metastasis and radiotherapy for the pancreatic tumor was achieved, chemotherapy was terminated and maintenance therapy was applied: nivolumab plus cytokine-induced killer cell therapy initially and then a de-escalated dosing interval of nivolumab monotherapy subsequently. No adverse events occurred during nivolumab therapy for more than 2 years, and the patient remains disease-free. To date, this is the first report of maintenance nivolumab after successful multimodality therapy in metastatic PDAC.

Randomized Phase II Trial Evaluating Two Sequential Treatments in First Line of Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Results of the PANOPTIMOX-PRODIGE 35 Trial

PURPOSE

Metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) still harbors a dismal prognosis. Our previous trial (PRODIGE 4-ACCORD 11) demonstrated the superiority of 6-month chemotherapy with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) over gemcitabine for overall survival. The high limiting oxaliplatin-related neurotoxicity supports the evaluation of an oxaliplatin stop-and-go strategy and a sequential strategy in mPC.

METHODS

In this phase II study, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 6 months of FOLFIRINOX (arm A), 4 months of FOLFIRINOX followed by leucovorin plus fluorouracil maintenance treatment for controlled patients (arm B), or a sequential treatment alternating gemcitabine and fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan every 2 months (arm C). The primary end point was progression-free survival at 6 months.

RESULTS

Between January 2015 and November 2016, 276 patients (mean age: 63 years; range: 40-76 years) were enrolled (A: 91, B: 92, and C: 90). Grade 3 or 4 neurotoxicity occurred in 10.2% of patients in arm A and 19.8% in arm B. The median ratio of received dose/targeted dose of oxaliplatin was 83% in arm A and 92% in arm B. The 6-month progression-free survival was 47.1% in A, 42.9% in B, and 34.1% in C. The median overall survival was 10.1 months in arm A, 11.2 in arm B, and 7.3 in arm C. Median survival without deterioration in quality-of-life scores was higher in the maintenance arm (11.4 months) than in arms A and C (7.2 and 7.5 months, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Maintenance with leucovorin plus fluorouracil appears to be feasible and effective in patients with mPC controlled after 4 months of induction chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX. Severe neurotoxicity was higher in the maintenance therapy arm, probably because of the higher cumulative dose of oxaliplatin.

Beyond the Front Line: Emerging Data for Maintenance Therapy in Pancreatic Cancer

The Oncology Grand Rounds series is designed to place original reports published in the Journal into clinical context. A case presentation is followed by a description of diagnostic and management challenges, a review of the relevant literature, and a summary of the authors' suggested management approaches. The goal of this series is to help readers better understand how to apply the results of key studies, including those published in Journal of Clinical Oncology, to patients seen in their own clinical practice.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Therapeutics Targeting RTK and TGF Beta Receptor

Despite the improved overall survival rates in most cancers, pancreatic cancer remains one of the deadliest cancers in this decade. The rigid microenvironment, which majorly comprises cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs), plays an important role in the obstruction of pancreatic cancer therapy. To overcome this predicament, the signaling of receptor tyrosine kinases (RTKs) and TGF beta receptor (TGFβR) in both pancreatic cancer cell and supporting CAF should be considered as the therapeutic target. The activation of receptors has been reported to be aberrant to cell cycle regulation, and signal transduction pathways, such as growth-factor induced proliferation, and can also influence the apoptotic sensitivity of tumor cells. In this article, the regulation of RTKs/TGFβR between pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and CAFs, as well as the RTKs/TGFβR inhibitor-based clinical trials on pancreatic cancer are reviewed.

Risk of Thrombocytopenia With Platelet-Derived Growth Factor Receptor Kinase Inhibitors in Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Phase 2/3 Randomized, Controlled Trials

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to fully investigate the thrombocytopenia of platelet-derived growth factor receptor kinase inhibitors (PDGFR-TKIs) in cancer patients. Databases were searched for randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) treated with PDGFR-TKIs until January 2021. The relevant RCTs in cancer patients treated with PDGFR-TKIs were retrieved, and the systematic evaluation was conducted. Nineteen RCTs and 3962 patients were included. Our study suggests that PDGFR-TKIs significantly increased the risks of all-grade (risk ratio [RR], 5.72; 95%CI, 4.32-7.59; P < .00001; I² = 32%) and high-grade (RR, 5.65; 95%CI, 3.28-9.75; P < .00001; I² = 0%) thrombocytopenia in cancer patients. Sunitinib is associated with the highest risk of thrombocytopenia among the included PDGFR-TKIs. The RR of high-grade thrombocytopenia varies significantly according to treatment line and median age. The available data suggested that the use of PDGFR-TKIs was associated with a significantly increased risk of thrombocytopenia.

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.

Repurposing metformin for the treatment of gastrointestinal cancer

Diabetes mellitus type 2 and cancer share many risk factors. The pleiotropic insulin-dependent and insulin-independent effects of metformin might inhibit pathways that are frequently amplified in neoplastic tissue. Particularly, modulation of inflammation, metabolism, and cell cycle arrest are potential therapeutic cancer targets utilized by metformin to boost the anti-cancer effects of chemotherapy. Studies in vitro and in vivo models have demonstrated the potential of metformin as a chemo- and radiosensitizer, besides its chemopreventive and direct therapeutic activity in digestive system (DS) tumors. Hence, these aspects have been considered in many cancer clinical trials. Case-control and cohort studies and associated meta-analyses have evaluated DS cancer risk and metformin usage, especially in colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Most clinical studies have demonstrated the protective role of metformin in the risk for DS cancers and survival rates. On the other hand, the ability of metformin to enhance the actions of chemotherapy for gastric and biliary cancers is yet to be investigated. This article reviews the current findings on the anti-cancer mechanisms of metformin and its apparatus from pre-clinical and ongoing studies in DS malignancies.

Pancreas cancer: Therapeutic trials in metastatic disease

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a major cause of cancer-related mortality in 2021. Cytotoxic therapies are the therapeutic mainstay for PDAC. The recent approval of olaparib as maintenance therapy for germline BRCA1/2-mutated PDAC and pembrolizumab for mismatch repair deficient PDAC represent molecularly targeted approaches for this disease. Investigational therapeutic strategies include targeting the stroma, metabolism, tumor microenvironment, and the immune system, and selected approaches are reviewed herein.

Alternatives to Perpetual Chemotherapy for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

With the advent of multiagent chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer, subgroups of patients whose disease responds durably to treatment are emerging. Although this is wonderful progress in the face of a deadly illness, cumulative toxicities of perpetual chemotherapy over months or even years of treatment degrade quality of life and organ function, in addition to fueling eventual therapeutic resistance. The POLO trial demonstrated a benefit of maintenance olaparib compared with placebo in patients with germline pathogenic variants in BRCA1 or BRCA2 The success of this trial, albeit in a limited subset of patients, suggests that there may be opportunity to study this alternative treatment strategy as a paradigm for a broader group of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. This article discusses the phenotypic and genotypic signatures of patients with pancreatic cancer that may provide the basis upon which to design rational maintenance clinical trials.

A Clinically Applicable 24-Protein Model for Classifying Risk Subgroups in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas using Multiple Reaction Monitoring-Mass Spectrometry

PURPOSE

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) subtypes have been identified using various methodologies. However, it is a challenge to develop classification system applicable to routine clinical evaluation. We aimed to identify risk subgroups based on molecular features and develop a classification model that was more suited for clinical applications.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

We collected whole dissected specimens from 225 patients who underwent surgery at Seoul National University Hospital [Seoul, Republic of Korea (South)], between October 2009 and February 2018. Target proteins with potential relevance to tumor progression or prognosis were quantified with robust quality controls. We used hierarchical clustering analysis to identify risk subgroups. A random forest classification model was developed to predict the identified risk subgroups, and the model was validated using transcriptomic datasets from external cohorts (N = 700), with survival analysis.

RESULTS

We identified 24 protein features that could classify the four risk subgroups associated with patient outcomes: stable, exocrine-like; activated, and extracellular matrix (ECM) remodeling. The "stable" risk subgroup was characterized by proteins that were associated with differentiation and tumor suppressors. "Exocrine-like" tumors highly expressed pancreatic enzymes. Two high-risk subgroups, "activated" and "ECM remodeling," were enriched in terms such as cell cycle, angiogenesis, immunocompetence, tumor invasion metastasis, and metabolic reprogramming. The classification model that included these features made prognoses with relative accuracy and precision in multiple cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

We proposed PDAC risk subgroups and developed a classification model that may potentially be useful for routine clinical implementations, at the individual level. This clinical system may improve the accuracy of risk prediction and treatment guidelines.See related commentary by Thakur and Singh, p. 3272.

Neoantigen-based immunotherapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

Neoantigens generated in neoplasms are a type of protein completely absent in healthy tissues. Therefore, anti-tumor immunity targeting neoantigens is highly specific, which provides an optional approach to boost tumor immunotherapy. Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal malignancies in humans, with few efficient treatments to improve its prognosis. Therefore, immunotherapies reinforced by neoantigen-based strategies should be considered. In PDAC, the mutational burden is intermediate compared with other common malignancies, while the naturally formed tumor immunity is significantly inferior. Moreover, the high mutation load in PDAC correlates with a poor clinical prognosis, although the combination of a large mutation repertoire and competent T cell population is indispensable for long-term survival. In clinical practice, three strategies have been mainly used: peptide or tumor cell vaccines, neo-epitope-coding nucleotide vaccines, and dendritic cell vaccines. However, three major problems remain to be addressed, including (1) highly personalized protocols after sampling, (2) insufficient neoantigen quantity, and (3) ineffective immunotherapy of PDAC. In summary, neoantigen-based therapy of PDAC is increasing and the treatment methods are accompanied by great challenges. Currently, extensive development is needed for effective neoantigen-based therapy.

FOLFIRINOX De-Escalation in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Multicenter Real-Life Study

BACKGROUND

Our study describes the feasibility and efficacy of a first-line FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5FU], folinic acid, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) induction chemotherapy (CT) followed by de-escalation as a maintenance strategy for advanced pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This multicenter retrospective study was conducted from January 2011 to December 2018. FOLFIRINOX de-escalation was defined as stopping oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan after at least four cycles of FOLFIRINOX, without evidence of disease progression. Maintenance schedules were fluoropyrimidine monotherapy (intravenous or oral [capecitabine]), FOLFOX (5FU, oxaliplatin), or FOLFIRI (5FU, irinotecan). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were first progression-free survival (PFS1), second progression-free survival (PFS2), and toxicity.

RESULTS

Among 321 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, 147 (45.8%) were included. Median OS was 16.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.7-20.3) and median PFS1 was 9.4 months (95% CI, 8.5-10.4). The preferred maintenance regimen was FOLFIRI in 66 (45%) patients versus 5FU monotherapy in 52 (35%) and FOLFOX in 25 (17%) patients. Among 118 patients who received maintenance CT with FOLFIRI or 5FU, there was no difference in PFS1 (median, 9.0 vs. 10.1 months, respectively; p = .33) or OS (median, 16.6 vs. 18.7 months; p = .86) between the two maintenance regimens. Reintroduction of FOLFIRINOX was performed in 20.2% of patients, with a median PFS2 of 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.0-22.3). The rates of grade 3-4 toxicity were significantly higher with FOLFIRI maintenance CT than with 5FU (41% vs. 22%; p = .03), especially for neuropathy (73% vs. 9%).

CONCLUSION

5FU monotherapy maintenance appeared to be as effective as FOLFIRI, in a FOLFIRINOX de-escalation strategy, which is largely used in France.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

FOLFIRINOX de-escalation and maintenance is a feasible strategy in advanced pancreatic cancer that decreases chemotherapy toxicity to improve both survival and quality of life. Survivals in patients with maintenance therapy are clinically meaningful. Fluoropyrimidine monotherapy maintenance seems to be as efficient as FOLFIRI and should be a reference arm in future pancreatic cancer maintenance trials.

Immunotherapeutic strategies in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC): current perspectives and future prospects

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is among the deadliest human malignancies with a dismal prognosis. During PDAC progression, the immune response is affected as cancer cells evade detection and elimination. Recently, there have been advances in the treatment of PDAC using immunotherapy, although a lot more work is yet to be done. In this review, we discuss these advances, challenges and potentials. We focus on existing and potential immune targets for PDAC, drugs used to target them, and some clinical trials conducted so far with them. Finally, novel targets in the tumour microenvironment such as stromal cells and other potential future areas to explore including bacterial therapy and the use of neoantigens in immunotherapy are highlighted.

Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Moving Forward

Globally, the death rate of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has doubled over 30 years and is likely to further increase, making PDAC a leading cause of cancer-related death in the coming years. PDAC is typically diagnosed at an advanced stage, and modified FOLFIRINOX or nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine are the mainstay of systemic therapy. For elderly patients with good performance status, low-dose treatment can preserve quality of life without compromising cancer control or survival. Maintenance therapy should be considered in PDAC patients achieving disease control with systemic therapy. In particular, olaparib has demonstrated a progression-free survival benefit of 3.6 months in a subgroup of PDAC patients with germline BRCA1/2 mutations (ca. 10% of all PDAC). Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy is often omitted in the treatment of patients with PDAC, with possibly deleterious consequences. Small intestinal bacterial overgrowth is highly prevalent in patients with PDAC and should be considered in the diagnostic algorithm of PDAC patients with bloating and diarrhea. Rivaroxaban has been associated with a reduced risk of thrombosis without an increase in major bleeding events, and its use should be considered in every patient with advanced PDAC undergoing systemic therapy.

Maintenance therapies in metastatic pancreatic cancer: present and future with a focus on PARP inhibitors

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs) are now more effectively controlled using chemotherapy combinations such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (NabP) regimens with a subset of patients who achieve a sustained tumor stabilization or response. The next challenge is to design maintenance therapies that result in continued tumor control with minimal toxicity. Quality of life should always be a priority in these patients with prolonged survival. Gradually tapering off the intensity of chemotherapy by suppressing drug(s) in the combination is one option. Thus, maintenance with 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine as single agents after FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine-NabP induction, respectively, seems to be a promising approach to minimize neurotoxicity while maintaining efficacy. Another option is to introduce maintenance drug(s) with different anti-tumoral actions. The recent example of olaparib in patients with BRCA mutated PDAC provides a promising proof-of-concept of a switch maintenance strategy in this setting.

An exploratory study of metformin with or without rapamycin as maintenance therapy after induction chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Purpose: Metformin combined with the mTOR inhibitor rapamycin showed potential synergistic anti-tumor activity in preclinical studies in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA). This phase 1b study (NCT02048384) was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and activity of metformin +/– rapamycin in the maintenance setting for unselected patients with metastatic PDA (mPDA) treated with chemotherapy.

Materials and Methods: Eligible patients with stable or responding mPDA after ≥ 6 months on chemotherapy were randomized 1:1 to metformin alone (Arm A) or with rapamycin (Arm B), stratified by prior treatment with FOLFIRINOX. Fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET scans and peripheral blood mononuclear cells were obtained for exploratory analyses.

Results: 22 subjects (11 per arm) received treatment per protocol. Median PFS/OS were 3.5 and 13.2 months respectively, with 2 year OS rate of 37%; there were no differences between arms. No responses were observed by RECIST; however, decreases in FDG avidity and/or CA19-9 were observed in several long-term survivors. Treatment related adverse events of Grade ≥ 3 occurred in 0% vs 27% of patients in Arm A vs B and were asymptomatic hematologic or electrolyte abnormalities that were not clinically significant. Improved survival was associated with low baseline neutrophil: lymphocyte ratio, baseline lack of assessable disease by PET, and greater expansion of dendritic cells following treatment.

Conclusions: Metformin +/– rapamycin maintenance for mPDA was well-tolerated and several patients achieved stable disease associated with exceptionally long survival. Further prospective studies are needed to clarify the role of these agents in the maintenance setting and to enhance patient selection for such approaches.

Patient burden and clinical advances associated with postapproval monotherapy cancer drug trials: a retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

After regulatory approval, drug companies, public funding agencies and academic researchers often pursue trials aimed at extending the uses of a new drug by testing it in new non-approved indications. Patient burden and clinical impact of such research are not well understood.

DESIGN AND SETTING

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of postapproval clinical trials launched within 5 years after the drug's first approval, testing anticancer drugs in monotherapy in indications that were first pursued after a drug's first Food and Drug Administration (FDA) license, for all 12 anticancer drugs approved between 2005 and 2007. FDA, Medline and Embase search date 2019 February 12.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Our primary objective was to measure burden and clinical impact for patients enrolling in these trials. Each trial was sorted into a 'trajectory' defined by the drug and cancer indication. The risk was operationalised by proportions of grade 3-4 severe adverse events and deaths. The clinical impact was measured by estimating the proportion of patients participating in trajectories that resulted in FDA approval, uptake into National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines or advancement to randomised controlled trials within 8 years.

RESULTS

Our search captured 104 published trials exploring monotherapy, including 69 unique trajectories. In total, trials in our sample enrolled 4699 patients. Grade 3-4 adverse events were experienced by 19.6% of patients; grade 5 events were experienced by 2.8% of patients. None of the trajectories launched after initial drug approval received FDA approval. Five trajectories were recommended by the NCCN within 8 years of the first trial within that trajectory. Eleven trajectories were advanced to randomised controlled testing.

CONCLUSIONS

The challenges associated with unlocking new applications for drugs that first received approval from 2005 to 2007 were similar to those for developing new drugs altogether. Our findings can help inform priority setting in research and provide a basis for calibrating expectations when considering enrolment in label-extending trials.

From Genetic Alterations to Tumor Microenvironment: The Ariadne's String in Pancreatic Cancer

The threatening notoriety of pancreatic cancer mainly arises from its negligible early diagnosis, highly aggressive progression, failure of conventional therapeutic options and consequent very poor prognosis. The most important driver genes of pancreatic cancer are the oncogene KRAS and the tumor suppressors TP53, CDKN2A, and SMAD4. Although the presence of few drivers, several signaling pathways are involved in the oncogenesis of this cancer type, some of them with promising targets for precision oncology. Pancreatic cancer is recognized as one of immunosuppressive phenotype cancer: it is characterized by a fibrotic-desmoplastic stroma, in which there is an intensive cross-talk between several cellular (e.g., fibroblasts, myeloid cells, lymphocytes, endothelial, and myeloid cells) and acellular (collagen, fibronectin, and soluble factors) components. In this review; we aim to describe the current knowledge of the genetic/biological landscape of pancreatic cancer and the composition of its tumor microenvironment; in order to better direct in the intrinsic labyrinth of this complex tumor type. Indeed; disentangling the genetic and molecular characteristics of cancer cells and the environment in which they evolve may represent the crucial step towards more effective therapeutic strategies

The Tumor Vessel Targeting Strategy: A Double-Edged Sword in Tumor Metastasis

Tumor vessels provide essential paths for tumor cells to escape from the primary tumor and form metastatic foci in distant organs. The vessel targeting strategy has been widely used as an important clinical cancer chemotherapeutic strategy for patients with metastatic tumors. Our review introduces the contribution of angiogenesis to tumor metastasis and summarizes the application of Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved vessel targeting drugs for metastatic tumors. We recommend the application and mechanisms of vascular targeting drugs for inhibiting tumor metastasis and discuss the risk and corresponding countermeasures after vessel targeting treatment.

CX-5461 Inhibits Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Cell Growth, Migration and Induces DNA Damage

Background: Inhibition of ribosome biogenesis has recently emerged as a promising strategy for the treatment of metastatic tumors. The RNA polymerase I inhibitor CX-5461 has shown efficacy in a panel of cancer types and is currently being tested in clinical trials. However, further preclinical studies to unravel molecular mechanisms underlying the activity of this drug are warranted. Methods: In this study, we have investigated the effects of CX-5461 on cell growth and migration of pancreatic cancer cells by the sulforhodamine-B and wound healing assay, respectively. Furthermore, we assessed the expression of epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) genes by qRT-PCR, while protein expression of DNA damage marker phospho-H2A.X was studied by Western blot and immunofluorescence. Results: CX-5461 inhibits pancreatic cancer cell growth in the nanomolar range and inhibits the migratory capability of the cells. Additionally, CX-5461 induced expression of EMT factor SNAI1 and caused DNA double-strand breaks as measured by increased expression of phospho-H2A.X. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that CX-5461 is active against pancreatic cancer cells and modulation of EMT factors, as well as increased expression of phospho-H2A.X, support further pre-/clinical investigations, including the analyses of these markers.

Targeting the complexity of Src signalling in the tumour microenvironment of pancreatic cancer: from mechanism to therapy

Pancreatic cancer, a disease with extremely poor prognosis, has been notoriously resistant to virtually all forms of treatment. The dynamic crosstalk that occurs between tumour cells and the surrounding stroma, frequently mediated by intricate Src/FAK signalling, is increasingly recognised as a key player in pancreatic tumourigenesis, disease progression and therapeutic resistance. These important cues are fundamental for defining the invasive potential of pancreatic tumours, and several components of the Src and downstream effector signalling have been proposed as potent anticancer therapeutic targets. Consequently, numerous agents that block this complex network are being extensively investigated as potential antiinvasive and antimetastatic therapeutic agents for this disease. In this review, we will discuss the latest evidence of Src signalling in PDAC progression, fibrotic response and resistance to therapy. We will examine future opportunities for the development and implementation of more effective combination regimens, targeting key components of the oncogenic Src signalling axis, and in the context of a precision medicine-guided approach.

Maintenance Olaparib for Germline BRCA-Mutated Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation make up a small subgroup of those with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib has had antitumor activity in this population.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial to evaluate the efficacy of olaparib as maintenance therapy in patients who had a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer and disease that had not progressed during first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 3:2 ratio, to receive maintenance olaparib tablets (300 mg twice daily) or placebo. The primary end point was progression-free survival, which was assessed by blinded independent central review.

RESULTS

Of the 3315 patients who underwent screening, 154 underwent randomization and were assigned to a trial intervention (92 to receive olaparib and 62 to receive placebo). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the olaparib group than in the placebo group (7.4 months vs. 3.8 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.35 to 0.82; P = 0.004). An interim analysis of overall survival, at a data maturity of 46%, showed no difference between the olaparib and placebo groups (median, 18.9 months vs. 18.1 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.46; P = 0.68). There was no significant between-group difference in health-related quality of life, as indicated by the overall change from baseline in the global quality-of-life score (on a 100-point scale, with higher scores indicating better quality of life) based on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (between-group difference, -2.47 points; 95% CI, -7.27 to 2.33). The incidence of grade 3 or higher adverse events was 40% in the olaparib group and 23% in the placebo group (between-group difference, 16 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.02 to 31); 5% and 2% of the patients, respectively, discontinued the trial intervention because of an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with a germline BRCA mutation and metastatic pancreatic cancer, progression-free survival was longer with maintenance olaparib than with placebo. (Funded by AstraZeneca and others; POLO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02184195.).

Clinical Trials Targeting the Stroma in Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The tumor microenvironment plays an important role in the initiation and progression of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In this systematic review, we provide an overview of clinical trials with stroma-targeting agents. We systematically searched MEDLINE/PubMed and the EMBASE database, using the PRISMA guidelines, for eligible clinical trials. In total, 2330 records were screened, from which we have included 106 articles. A meta-analysis could be performed on 51 articles which describe the targeting of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway, and three articles which describe the targeting of hyaluronic acid. Anti-VEGF therapies did not show an increase in median overall survival (OS) with combined hazard ratios (HRs) of 1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.13). Treatment with hyaluronidase PEGPH20 showed promising results, but, thus far, only in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in selected patients with hyaluronic acid (HA)high tumors: An increase in median progression free survival (PFS) of 2.9 months, as well as a HR of 0.51 (95% CI 0.26-1.00). In conclusion, we found that anti-angiogenic therapies did not show an increased benefit in median OS or PFS in contrast to promising results with anti-hyaluronic acid treatment in combination with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel. The PEGPH20 clinical trials used patient selection to determine eligibility based on tumor biology, which underlines the importance to personalize treatment for pancreatic cancer patients.

Risk of hand-foot skin reaction associated with vascular endothelial growth factor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors: A meta-analysis of 57 randomized controlled trials involving 24,956 patients

BACKGROUND

Multiple randomized controlled trials have assessed hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) caused by vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs).

OBJECTIVE

We performed a meta-analysis to determine the incidence and the relative risk (RR) of HFSR associated with these agents.

METHODS

Databases were searched for relevant studies. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidences, RR, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using random-effects or fixed-effects models according to the heterogeneity of the included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 24,956 patients from 57 studies were included. The overall incidence of all-grade and high-grade HFSR associated with VEGFR-TKIs was 35.0% (95% CI, 28.6%-41.6%) and 9.7% (95% CI, 7.3%-12.3%), respectively. The use of VEGFR-TKIs significantly increased the risk of developing all-grade (RR, 5.09; 95% CI, 3.52-7.35; P < .001) and high-grade (RR, 9.42; 95% CI, 5.59-15.90; P < .001) HFSR. Subgroup analyses revealed that the risk of HFSR was significantly increased according to tumor type, VEGFR-TKI, trial phase, treatment regimen, and control therapy. No evidence of publication bias was observed.

LIMITATION

High heterogeneity in most studies.

CONCLUSION

High risk of HFSR is prone to develop in cancer patients receiving VEGFR-TKIs.

Role of angiogenesis in pancreatic cancer biology and therapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a poor prognosis, and there is a close parallel between disease mortality and incidence. Malignancy is often diagnosed at an advanced stage due to the lack of early symptoms. For the majority of advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer patients, therapeutic options are limited. Although several new chemotherapeutic regimens have been developed, the overall response rate remains low. Invasive tumour growth and distant metastasis require angiogenesis, a hallmark of cancer, and angiogenic inhibition is a valuable option for cancer therapy. Some anti-angiogenic drugs have been developed for cancer treatment. This review will focus on the role of angiogenesis and anti-angiogenic treatment strategies as well as combination therapy in pancreatic cancer. Translational information from recent molecular biology and animal studies is also summarized. Finally, the dosing schedule for bevacizumab with other chemotherapeutic protocols for pancreatic cancer treatment is discussed.

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 Ib trial combining capecitabine, erlotinib and bevacizumab in pancreatic adenocarcinoma - REBECA trial

Background Purpose of this phase Ib trial was to establish the maximum tolerable dose (MTD) of capecitabine and to escalate the dosages of erlotinib and bevacizumab to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in patients with advanced/metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma not pretreated for metastatic disease. Methods Starting doses were capecitabine 500 mg/m² bid orally continuously, erlotinib 100 mg orally daily, and bevacizumab 5 mg/kg intravenously q 2 weeks. Dose escalation was performed according to a 3 + 3 design for capecitabine until MTD, for erlotinib and bevacizumab until the maximum doses registered by applying a substance-related, toxicity-based scheme accompanied by pharmacokinetic analysis. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were determined pretherapeutically by immunohistochemical identification after enrichment with immunomagnetic separation. Results Thirty patients were evaluable at six dose levels. 900 mg/m² bid were determined as MTD for capecitabine based on dose-limiting toxicities: cutaneous in two patients and vascular in another. The most severe (Grade (G)3/4) drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (toxicities) belonged to the categories gastrointestinal, vascular, cutaneous, cardiovascular, metabolic/nutritional or hematological. G3 toxicities occurred in 14 (47%), G3 + G4 in a single (3%) patient. 2 out of 28 patients (7%) exerted partial response, 17 (61%) stable disease. Pharmacokinetic evaluation revealed lack of drug-drug interaction between capecitabine and erlotinib and their metabolites. Presence of CTCs was associated with shorter progression-free survival (p = 0.009). Conclusions The study met the primary objective. RP2D was capecitabine 800 mg/m² bid continuously, erlotinib 150 mg daily, and bevacizumab 10 mg/kg q 2 weeks. The regimen could be applied safely, but demonstrated limited efficacy.

Advanced pancreatic cancer: The standard of care and new opportunities

Presentation of pancreatic cancer is localized, locally advanced or metastatic. With the later represented the main bulk (more than 80%). Despite the significant innovation in molecular analysis and therapeutic approach in many types of cancer in the last two decades, still the outcome of advanced pancreatic cancer is disappointing and the mortality rate approximately unchanged. In this mandated review we intended to highlight the standard of care and emerging agents for advanced pancreatic cancer treatment.

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.

The pancreatic niche inhibits the effectiveness of sunitinib treatment of pancreatic cancer

Current treatments for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) are ineffective, making this the 4^th leading cause of cancer deaths. Sunitinib is a broad-spectrum inhibitor of tyrosine kinase receptors mostly known for its anti-angiogenic effects. We tested the therapeutic effects of sunitinib in pancreatic cancer using the Ela-myc transgenic mouse model. We showed that Ela-myc pancreatic tumors express PDGFR and VEGFR in blood vessels and epithelial cells, rendering these tumors sensitive to sunitinib by more than only its anti-angiogenic activity. However, sunitinib treatment of Ela-myc mice with either early or advanced tumor progression had no impact on either survival or tumor burden. Further histopathological characterization of these tumors did not reveal differences in necrosis, cell differentiation, angiogenesis, apoptosis or proliferation. In stark contrast, in vitro sunitinib treatment of Ela-myc– derived cell lines showed high sensitivity to the drug, with increased apoptosis and reduced proliferation. Correspondingly, subcutaneous tumors generated from these cell lines completely regressed in vivo after sunitinib treatments. These data point at the pancreatic tumor microenvironment as the most likely barrier preventing sunitinib treatment efficiency in vivo. Combined treatments with drugs that disrupt tumor fibrosis may enhance sunitinib therapeutic effectiveness in pancreatic cancer treatment.

Incidence and risk of hypertension associated with vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors in cancer patients: a comprehensive network meta-analysis of 72 randomized controlled trials involving 30013 patients

Background

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) have been developed during the last decade that target the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) are currently being evaluated as treatments for malignant tumors. The increased application of VEGFR-TKIs means that the probability of hypertension is a serious concern. However, the reported incidence varies markedly between clinical trials. Here, we undertook an up-to-date, comprehensive meta-analysis on clinical works to build the incidence of hypertension along with VEGFR-TKIs. The goal was to understand better of the overall venture of cancer patients’ hypertension treated with these drugs.

Methods

Databases (EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane library) and the abstracts of the American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting and European Society of Medical Oncology were searched to identify related studies. 95% confidence intervals (CIs), summary incidences, and relative risk (RR) were calculated utilizing either fixed-effects models on the basis of the heterogeneity of the included studies or random-effects.

Results

Seventy-two randomized controlled trials (including 30013 patients) were involved. The total incidence of high-grade and all-grade hypertensive events along with VEGFR-TKIs was 23.0% (95% CI, 20.1–26.0%) and 4.4% (95% CI, 3.7–5.0%), respectively. The use of VEGFR-TKIs remarkably enhanced the venture of developing high-grade (RR, 4.60; 95% CI, 3.92–5.40; P < 0.001) and all-grade (RR, 3.85; 95% CI, 3.37–4.40; P < 0.001) hypertensive events. Subgroup analyses revealed that the risk of a hypertensive event varied significantly in accordance with tumor type, VEGFR-TKI, trial phase, VEGFR-TKIs-based regimen, control therapy, and chemotherapy regimen.

Conclusions

Patients with cancer that receive VEGFR-TKIs are at a remarkable venture of developing hypertension. Therefore, suitable treatment and monitoring should be introduced to avoid cardiovascular complications.

Targeted Therapies for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer related death and by 2030, it will be second only to lung cancer. We have seen tremendous advances in therapies for lung cancer as well as other solid tumors using a molecular targeted approach but our progress in treating pancreatic cancer has been incremental with median overall survival remaining less than one year. There is an urgent need for improved therapies with better efficacy and less toxicity. Small molecule inhibitors, monoclonal antibodies and immune modulatory therapies have been used. Here we review the progress that we have made with these targeted therapies.

Cardiovascular diseases in patients receiving small molecules with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor activity: A meta-analysis of approximately 29,000 cancer patients

Background

Targeted therapy with tyrosine kinase inhibitors with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor activity improves survival of cancer patients. Cardiovascular complications are critical and it is unknown whether these require specific treatment strategies. We aimed to clarify the associated risk of cardiovascular adverse events in patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors.

Design

The design of this study was a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE and Web of Science databases for randomised controlled trials published until January 2017 that assessed patients with different types of cancer treated with or without tyrosine kinase inhibitors in addition to standard chemotherapy.

Results

A total of 29,252 patients from 71 randomised controlled trials were included. Tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment was associated with a higher cardiac ischaemia relative risk (relative risk = 1.69; 95% confidence interval: 1.12–2.57; p = 0.01), with the highest risks observed for sorafenib and patients with renal cancer. Risk of thrombocytopaenia (relative risk = 2.2; 95% confidence interval: 1.73–2.79; p < 0.001) was highest for regorafenib and patients with breast cancer. Left ventricular systolic dysfunction was increased after tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (relative risk = 2.53; 95% confidence interval:1.79 – 3.57; p < 0.001), with the highest risks reported for sunitinib and hepatocellular cancer. QT corrected interval prolongation (relative risk = 6.25; 95% confidence interval: 3.44–11.38; p < 0.001) and arterial hypertension (relative risk = 3.78; 95% confidence interval: 3.15-4.54; p < 0.001) were reported. The relative risks of arterial adverse events, cerebral ischaemia, venous adverse events and pulmonary embolism were similar across groups.

Conclusion

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors increase the risk of severe cardiovascular and particularly thrombotic adverse events. Specific treatment regimens when prescribing tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapies appear desirable.