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

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review synthesises all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making. It updates the previous version of the review, published in 2018.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both on overall survival, severe or life-threatening adverse events, and quality of life in people undergoing first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CANCERLIT, and handsearched various sources for additional studies. The latest search dates were in March and July 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both with another intervention or best supportive care. Participants were required to have locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer or metastatic pancreatic cancer not amenable to curative intent treatment. Histological confirmation was required. Trials were required to report overall survival.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies in the review and 51 in the meta-analysis (11,333 participants). We divided the studies into seven categories: any anti-cancer treatment versus best supportive care; various chemotherapy types versus gemcitabine; gemcitabine-based combinations versus gemcitabine alone; various chemotherapy combinations versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel; fluoropyrimidine-based studies; miscellaneous studies; and radiotherapy studies. In general, the included studies were at low risk for random sequence generation, detection bias, attrition bias, and reporting bias, at unclear risk for allocation concealment, and high risk for performance bias. Compared to best supportive care, chemotherapy likely results in little to no difference in overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.33; absolute risk of death at 12 months of 971 per 1000 versus 962 per 1000; 4 studies, 298 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The adverse effects of chemotherapy and impacts on quality of life (QoL) were uncertain. Many of the chemotherapy regimens were outdated. Eight studies compared non-gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens to gemcitabine. These showed that 5-fluorouracil (5FU) likely reduces OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27; risk of death at 12 months of 914 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 1 study, 126 participants; moderate certainty), and grade 3/4 adverse events (QoL not reported). Fixed dose rate gemcitabine likely improves OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94; risk of death at 12 months of 683 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 2 studies, 644 participants; moderate certainty), and likely increase grade 3/4 adverse events (QoL not reported). FOLFIRINOX improves OS (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60; risk of death at 12 months of 524 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; P < 0.001; 2 studies, 652 participants; high certainty), and delays deterioration in QoL, but increases grade 3/4 adverse events. Twenty-eight studies compared gemcitabine-based combinations to gemcitabine. Gemcitabine plus platinum may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08; risk of death at 12 months of 745 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 6 studies, 1140 participants; low certainty), may increase grade 3/4 adverse events, and likely worsens QoL. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improves OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95; risk of death at 12 months of 722 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 10 studies, 2718 participants; high certainty), likely increases grade 3/4 adverse events, and likely improves QoL. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitors result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.16; risk of death at 12 months of 770 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 3 studies, 839 participants; high certainty), likely increases grade 3/4 adverse events, and likely does not alter QoL. Gemcitabine plus taxane result in a large improvement in OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81; risk of death at 12 months of 644 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 2 studies, 986 participants; high certainty), and likely increases grade 3/4 adverse events and improves QoL. Nine studies compared chemotherapy combinations to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. Fluoropyrimidine-based combination regimens improve OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.89; risk of death at 12 months of 542 per 1000 versus 628 per 1000; 6 studies, 1285 participants; high certainty). The treatment arms had distinct toxicity profiles, and there was little to no difference in QoL. Alternative schedules of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel likely result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.47; risk of death at 12 months of 663 per 1000 versus 628 per 1000; 2 studies, 367 participants; moderate certainty) or QoL, but may increase grade 3/4 adverse events. Four studies compared fluoropyrimidine-based combinations to fluoropyrimidines alone, with poor quality evidence. Fluoropyrimidine-based combinations are likely to result in little to no impact on OS (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.15; risk of death at 12 months of 765 per 1000 versus 704 per 1000; P = 0.27; 4 studies, 491 participants; moderate certainty) versus fluoropyrimidines alone. The evidence suggests that there was little to no difference in grade 3/4 adverse events or QoL between the two groups. We included only one radiotherapy (iodine-125 brachytherapy) study with 165 participants. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of radiotherapy on outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination chemotherapy remains standard of care for metastatic pancreatic cancer. Both FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus a taxane improve OS compared to gemcitabine alone. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that fluoropyrimidine-based combination chemotherapy regimens improve OS compared to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. The effects of radiotherapy were uncertain as only one low-quality trial was included. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individuals still remains unpersonalised, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to assist in rationalising treatment selection for patients.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

A multicenter retrospective observational NAPOLEON2 study of nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer

Nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid (NFF) is a standard regimen after gemcitabine-based therapy for patients with unresectable or recurrent pancreatic cancer. However, there are limited clinical data on its efficacy and safety in the real-world. We therefore initiated a retrospective and prospective observational study (NAPOLEON-2). The results of the retrospective part were reported herein. In this retrospective study, we evaluated 161 consecutive patients who received NFF as second-or-later-line regimen. The main endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the other endpoints were response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), dose intensity, and adverse events (AEs). The median age was 67 years (range, 38-85 years). The median OS and PFS were 8.1 and 3.4 months, respectively. The objective response and disease control rates were 5% and 52%, respectively. The median relative dose intensity was 81.6% for nanoliposomal irinotecan and 82.9% for fluorouracil. Grade 3 or 4 hematological and nonhematological AEs occurred in 47 and 42 patients, respectively. Common grade 3 or 4 AEs included neutropenia (24%), anorexia (12%), and leukocytopenia (12%). Subanalysis of patients treated with second-line and third-or-later-line demonstrated no statistical significant difference in OS (7.6 months vs. 9.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.35; p = 0.68). In conclusion, NFF has acceptable efficacy and safety profile even in real-world clinical settings. The prospective study is in progress to validate these findings.

The Natural Product Parthenolide Inhibits Both Angiogenesis and Invasiveness and Improves Gemcitabine Resistance by Suppressing Nuclear Factor κB Activation in Pancreatic Cancer Cell Lines

We previously established pancreatic cancer (PaCa) cell lines resistant to gemcitabine and found that the activity of nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) was enhanced upon the acquisition of gemcitabine resistance. Parthenolide, the main active ingredient in feverfew, has been reported to exhibit antitumor activity by suppressing the NF-κB signaling pathway in several types of cancers. However, the antitumor effect of parthenolide on gemcitabine-resistant PaCa has not been elucidated. Here, we confirmed that parthenolide significantly inhibits the proliferation of both gemcitabine-resistant and normal PaCa cells at concentrations of 10 µM and higher, and that the NF-κB activity is significantly inhibited, even by 1 µM parthenolide. In Matrigel invasion assays and angiogenesis assays, the invasive and angiogenic potentials were higher in gemcitabine-resistant than normal PaCa cells and were inhibited by a low concentration of parthenolide. Furthermore, Western blotting showed suppressed MRP1 expression in gemcitabine-resistant PaCa treated with a low parthenolide concentration. In a colony formation assay, the addition of 1 µM parthenolide improved the sensitivity of gemcitabine-resistant PaCa cell lines to gemcitabine. These results suggest that parthenolide may be used as a novel therapeutic agent for the treatment of gemcitabine-resistant PaCa.

Perioperative TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer: APOLLO-11 study

BACKGROUND

We investigated the feasibility of perioperative chemotherapy with S-1 and leucovorin (TAS-118) plus oxaliplatin in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer.

METHODS

Patients with clinical T3-4N1-3M0 gastric cancer received four courses of TAS-118 (40-60 mg/body, orally, twice daily for seven days) plus oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2, intravenously, day one) every two weeks preoperatively followed by gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy, followed by postoperative chemotherapy with either 12 courses of TAS-118 monotherapy (Step 1) or eight courses of TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin (Step 2). The primary endpoints were completion rates of preoperative chemotherapy with TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin and postoperative chemotherapy with TAS-118 monotherapy (Step 1) or TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin (Step 2).

RESULTS

Among 45 patients enrolled, the preoperative chemotherapy completion rate was 88.9% (90% CI 78.0-95.5). Major grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea (17.8%) and neutropenia (8.9%). The R0 resection rate was 95.6% (90% CI 86.7-99.2). Complete pathological response was achieved in 6 patients (13.3%). Dose-limiting toxicity was not observed in 31 patients receiving postoperative chemotherapy (Step 1, n = 11; Step 2, n = 20), and completion rates were 90.9% (95% CI 63.6-99.5) for Step 1 and 80.0% (95% CI 59.9-92.9) for Step 2. No more than 10% of grade ≥ 3 AEs were observed in  patients receiving Step 1. Hypokalaemia and neutropenia occurred in 3 and 2 patients, respectively, receiving Step 2. The 3-year recurrence-free and overall survival rates were 66.7% (95% CI 50.9-78.4) and 84.4% (95% CI 70.1-92.3), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative chemotherapy with TAS-118 plus oxaliplatin with D2 gastrectomy is feasible.

C-reactive protein/albumin ratio is the most significant inflammatory marker in unresectable pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel

There are limited absolute biomarkers for determining the prognosis before first- and second-line palliative chemotherapy in unresectable pancreatic cancer (urPC) patients. To find the best prognostic inflammatory marker, we investigated relationships between overall survival (OS) and six inflammatory markers; C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CAR), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), prognostic nutrition index (PNI), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), and prognostic index (PI). We examined 255 patients who received gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy and 159 patients who subsequently underwent second-line chemotherapy. First-line patients with lower CAR had better OS compared to those with a higher CAR (hazard ratio 0.57; 95% confidential index 0.42-77; P < 0.01). Similarly, lower NLR (P = 0.01), higher PNI (P = 0.04), lower PLR (P = 0.03), GPS score of 0 (P < 0.01) and PI score of 0 (P < 0.01) were all associated with better OS. CAR demonstrated the best superiority for determining survival prognosis through the use of area under the curve of time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic curves. Furthermore, a lower CAR before second-line therapy exhibited better OS versus higher CAR (P < 0.01). Therefore, CAR might be a useful biomarker for predicting urPC patient prognosis in both first- and second-line chemotherapy.

Scoring model with serum albumin and CA19-9 for metastatic pancreatic cancer in second-line treatment: results from the NAPOLEON study

BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer refractory to first-line chemotherapy (CTx) have few treatment options. It is unclear what kind of patients could be brought about survival benefit by 2nd-line CTx after refractory to gemcitabine + nab-PTX (GnP) or FOLFIRINOX.

METHODS

This analysis was conducted as part of a multicenter retrospective study of GnP or FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Excluding censored cases, 156 and 77 patients, respectively, received second-line chemotherapy (CTx) and best supportive care (BSC). Using prognostic factors for post-discontinuation survivals (PDSs) at the first-line determination in multivariate analysis, we developed a scoring system to demonstrate the benefit of second-line CTx.

RESULTS

The second-line CTx group had a median PDS of 5.2 months, whereas the BSC group had a median PDS of 2.7 months (hazard ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.57; p < 0.01). According to the Cox regression model, serum albumin levels below 3.5 g/dL, and CA19-9 levels above 1000 U/mL were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.01). Serum albumin (≥ and < 3.5 g/dL allotted to scores 0 and 1) and CA19-9 (< and ≥ 1000 U/mL allotted to scores 0 and 1) at first-line determination were used to develop the scoring system. The PDSs of patients with scores of 0 and 1 were significantly better than those of the BSC group; however, there was no significant difference between the PDSs of patients with score 2 and the BSC group.

CONCLUSION

The survival advantage of second-line CTx, was observed in patients with scores of 0 and 1 but not in those with score 2.

Second-line treatment options for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this review was to characterize the second- and later-line (≥2L) treatment landscape for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC).

METHODS

This systematic literature review (PROSPERO: CRD42021279753) involved searches of MEDLINE® and Embase to identify results from prospective studies of ≥2L treatment options for metastatic pancreatic cancer published from 2016 to 2021. Publications were screened according to predetermined eligibility criteria; population-level data were extracted using standardized data fields. Publication quality was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The data were analyzed descriptively, grouped by drug class.

RESULTS

Sixty publications were identified, including 23 relating to comparative trials. GRADE assessment found that, of these 23 trials, 83% reported high or moderate-quality evidence. Of the publications relating to comparative trials, nine (three trials) reported favorable results: the pivotal phase 3 NAPOLI-1 trial for liposomal irinotecan; a phase 3 trial of non-liposomal irinotecan within the FOLFIRINOX regimen; and a phase 2 trial of eryaspase plus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The level of unmet need for ≥2L treatment options for mPDAC remains high. Irinotecan-based regimens currently offer the greatest promise. Investigations into paradigm-changing agents and combination approaches continue.

A prospective phase II study of biweekly S-1, leucovorin, and gemcitabine in elderly patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma - The Taiwan Cooperative Oncology Group T1217 study

BACKGROUND

Elderly patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (APC) are conceived to be frailer and susceptible to treatment toxicity that has led to disparity in lower likelihood of receiving chemotherapy and survival. Optimal chemotherapy is an unmet medical need for elderly patients with APC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with chemo-naive APC, age ≥70 years, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score ≤2 were eligible. The treatment was consisted of biweekly gemcitabine 800 mg/m², 10 mg/m²/min infusion on day 1 plus oral S-1 and leucovorin (40-60 and 30 mg, respectively) twice daily on days 1-7, the GSL regimen. The primary end-point was progression-free survival with an interested P₁ of 5.0 months.

RESULTS

Of the 49 enrolled patients, the median age was 76 years, ECOG performance score ≥1 in 59.2%, metastatic diseases in 65.3%, Vulnerable Elders Survey-13 score ≥3 in 71.4%, and Geriatric 8 score ≤14 in 93.9%. After a median 11 cycles of treatment, the overall response rate and disease control rate were 26.5% and 75.5%, respectively. The median progression-free and overall survivals were 6.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.4-9.2) and 12.5 months (95% CI, 8.9-14.7), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related toxicities were anaemia (20.4%), neutropenia (18.4%), and mucositis (12.2%). Patients had improved emotional function and global health status scores during the GSL treatment.

CONCLUSION

The study met its primary end-point, which supports further investigation on the merit of GSL in Asian elderly APC patients.

10Z‑Hymenialdisine inhibits angiogenesis by suppressing NF‑κB activation in pancreatic cancer cell lines

10Z-Hymenialdisine is a natural product derived from the marine sponge Axinella carteri. 10Z-Hymenialdisine has anti-inflammatory effects exerted through NF-κB; however, it is unclear whether 10Z-Hymenialdisine has anti-angiogenic effects in cancer cells. In the present study, both the anti-angiogenic and antimetastatic effects of this compound in pancreatic cancer were investigated. It was initially confirmed that 10Z-Hymenialdisine significantly inhibited the proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells. Next, using both reverse transcription-quantitative PCR and ELISA, it was demonstrated that 10Z-Hymenialdisine significantly suppressed the expression of VEGF and IL-8 mRNAs and proteins in pancreatic cancer. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed that 10Z-Hymenialdisine inhibited NF-κB activity in pancreatic cancer cell lines. It was also identified that 10Z-Hymenialdisine inhibited tube formation in EA.hy926 cells. In vivo, 10Z-Hymenialdisine significantly inhibited the growth of BxPC-3 pancreatic cancer cells that were subcutaneously injected into model mice. In conclusion, the present study demonstrated that 10Z-Hymenialdisine exerted anti-angiogenic effects by suppressing NF-κB activity and angiogenic factors, such as VEGF and IL-8, in pancreatic cancer cell lines. 10Z-Hymenialdisine has potential applications as a novel therapeutic agent for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

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

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

Liposomal irinotecan pre-emptive dose reduction in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: 667 patients' experience within a population-based study

Background:

Liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (5-FU/LV) is currently the standard second-line treatment for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after previous failed gemcitabine-based therapy. This population-based study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV and the association of pre-emptive nal-IRI dosing with treatment outcomes in patients with PDAC.

Methods:

We retrospectively enrolled a total of 667 consecutive patients with PDAC who received nal-IRI plus 5-FU/LV treatment between August 2018 and November 2020 at 9 medical centers in Taiwan. Patients were allocated into groups according to pre-emptive nal-IRI dosing (⩾75%, 50–74%, <50%) for comparison of treatment efficacy and safety.

Results:

The median overall survival (OS) and time to treatment failure (TTF) were 5.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.3–6.5] and 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.6–3.0), respectively. The median OS was 6.5 months (95% CI, 5.7–6.7), 5.0 months (95% CI, 3.4–6.5), and 4.1 months (95% CI, 2.7–5.6), respectively, among the ⩾75%, 50–74%, and <50% pre-emptive nal-IRI dosing groups, whereas the median TTF of the three groups was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.6–3.4), 2.6 months (95% CI, 2.3–2.9), and 1.9 months (95% CI, 1.6–2.2), respectively. Pre-emptive nal-IRI dosing <50% was an independent negative prognostic factor for OS and TTF in multivariate analyses. The most common severe adverse events were neutropenia (22.9%), anemia (21.1%), and hypokalemia (15.4%). Patients in the <50% pre-emptive nal-IRI dosing group had a significantly lower incidence of neutropenia and non-neutropenic infection than those in the other groups.

Conclusion:

Our results support the use of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV as standard clinical practice for treating patients with PDAC based on this large population-based study. Our findings encourage physicians to provide adequate doses of nal-IRI in order to achieve better outcomes without compromising safety profiles.

nal-IRI+5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV in post-gemcitabine metastatic pancreatic cancer: Randomized phase 2 trial in Japanese patients

BACKGROUND

In the NAPOLI-1 phase 3 trial, liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) +5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) significantly increased mPFS versus 5-FU/LV (3.1 vs. 1.5 months [unstratified HR = 0.56, p = 0.0001]) in patients with mPAC that progressed on prior gemcitabine-based therapy. This randomized phase 2 trial evaluated nal-IRI+5-FU/LV tolerability (Part 1), safety, and efficacy (Part 2; outcomes reported here) in Japanese patients with mPAC that progressed on gemcitabine-based therapy.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 and stratified by KPS (70 and 80 vs. ≥90) and baseline albumin (≥4.0 g/dl vs. <4.0 g/dl). Primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints were ORR, DCR, OS, TTF, CA19-9 response, and QoL. The ITT population comprised all randomized patients.

RESULTS

Patient characteristics differed between nal-IRI+5-FU/LV (n = 40) and 5-FU/LV (n = 39) arms, including baseline hepatic lesions (63% vs. 51%), stage IV disease at diagnosis (78% vs. 51%), and post-study anticancer therapy (55% vs. 72%). Investigator-assessed mPFS increase with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV was clinically meaningful and statistically significant versus 5-FU/LV (2.7 vs. 1.5 months, HR = 0.60). Independently assessed mPFS showed similar trends (1.7 vs. 1.6 months, HR = 0.79). mOS was 6.3 months with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV and not reached with 5-FU/LV. ORR increased significantly with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV (18% vs. 0, rate difference 17.5). Commonly reported grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs were decreased neutrophil count (37% vs. 3%), decreased white blood cell count (20% vs. 0), and diarrhea (17% vs. 3%).

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, clinically meaningful and statistically significant gains in investigator-assessed PFS and ORR were observed with nal-IRI+5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV in Japanese patients, with no new or unexpected safety signals. (Clinicaltrials.gov ID: NCT02697058).

A retrospective comparative study of S-IROX and modified FOLFIRINOX for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer refractory to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of S-IROX and modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) after gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) in the real world setting.

METHODS

Consecutive patients receiving S-IROX or mFFX as a second-line chemotherapy for advanced PC refractory to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel were retrospectively studied. Patients were treated every 2 weeks: S-1 40 mg/m² was administered orally twice daily on days 1 to 7 in S-IROX and 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m² was intravenously administered for 46 h without bolus infusion in mFFX, in addition to intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² and irinotecan 150 mg/m² on day 1 in both regimens.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients with advanced PC who received S-IROX (n = 19) or mFFX (n = 35) were retrospectively studied. The disease control rate and response rate were 73.7% and 10.5% in the S-IROX group and 62.2% and 2.7% in the mFFX group, respectively. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.8 and 5.7 months in the S-IROX and mFFX groups (p = 0.24). The median overall survival (OS) was 14.2 and 11.5 months in the S-IROX and mFFX groups (p = 0.34). There were no significant differences in the incidences of grade 3-4 adverse effects. The subgroup analyses suggested S-IROX demonstrated favorable OS in patients with PFS ≥6 months of first-line gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (p for interaction = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

S-IROX and mFFX were similarly tolerable and effective as a second-line chemotherapy in patients with PC refractory to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel.

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram to predict survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving second-line palliative chemotherapy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Given that a wide variation in tumor response rates and survival times suggests heterogeneity among the patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) who underwent second-line (L2) chemotherapy, it is a challenge in clinical practice to identify patients who will receive the most benefit from L2 treatment.

METHODS

We selected 183 APC patients who received L2 palliative chemotherapy between 2010 and 2016 from a medical center as the development cohort. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify the prognostic factors and construct the nomogram. An independent cohort of 166 patients from three other hospitals was selected for external validation.

RESULTS

The nomogram was based on eight independent prognostic factors from the multivariate Cox model: sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, reason for first-line treatment discontinuation, duration of first-line treatment, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, tumor stage, body mass index, and serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels at the beginning of L2 treatment. The model exhibited good discrimination ability, with a C-index of 0.733 (95% confidence interval, 0.681-0.785) and 0.724 (95% confidence interval, 0.661-0.787) in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. The calibration plots of the development and validation cohorts showed optimal agreement between model prediction and actual observation in predicting survival probability at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed and externally validated a prognostic model that accurately predicts the survival outcome of APC patients before L2 palliative chemotherapy, which could assist in clinical decision-making, counseling for treatment, and most importantly, prognostic stratification of patients.

Modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy following gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

Background

There is no established second-line treatment after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) as a second-line therapy for MPC and to investigate prognostic factors for survival.

Methods

From 2015 to 2019, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients receiving mFFX for MPC after failure of GnP therapy. Patients were treated every 2 weeks with mFFX (intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², intravenous irinotecan 150 mg/m², and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m² for 46 h without bolus infusion).

Results

In total, 104 patients received mFFX. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2–9.8) and the progression-free survival (PFS) 3.9 months (95% CI 2.8–5.0). The objective response rate was 10.6% and the disease control rate 56.7%. The median relative dose intensities of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional 5-FU were 80.0% (range 21.5–100%), 77.2% (range 38.1–100%), and 85.9% (range 36.9–100%), respectively. Grade 3–4 toxicities were reported in 57 patients (54.8%), including neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Glasgow prognostic score and carcinoembryonic antigen level were independently associated with survival. Our prognostic model using these parameters could classify the patients into good (n = 38), intermediate (n = 47), and poor (n = 19) prognostic groups. The median OS and PFS time was 14.7 (95% CI 7.6–16.3) and 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1–10.5) for the good prognostic factors, 6.5 (95% CI 5.5–10.0) and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.7–4.8) for the intermediate prognostic factors and 5.0 (95% CI 2.9–6.6) and 1.7 months (95% CI 0.9–4.3) for the poor prognostic factors, respectively.

Conclusions

The mFFX showed to be a tolerable second-line treatment for MPC after GnP failure. Our prognostic model might be useful for deciding whether mFFX is indicated in this setting.

External validation of the Besançon nomogram in Asian patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving second-line chemotherapy: A multi-institute experience in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Determining survival outcome in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC) patients receiving second-line (L2) chemotherapy is important for clinical decision-making. The Besançon group from France recently proposed a prognostic nomogram to predict overall survival (OS) for aPDAC patients receiving L2 chemotherapy. The present study aimed to externally validate the performance of the Besançon nomogram in predicting OS in an Asian cohort.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 349 patients who received L2 chemotherapy for aPDAC between 2010 and 2016 at four institutes in Taiwan. The performance of the Besançon model in this cohort was evaluated with C-index and calibration plots.

RESULTS

The median OS time in our patient cohort was 4.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-5.0). Using the Besançon nomogram-predicted risk groups, the median OS times in the low, intermediate, and high-risk groups were 6.7 (95% CI, 5.3-8.2), 3.2 (95% CI, 2.4-3.9), and 1.7 months (95% CI, 0.6-2.7), respectively. The C-index of the predicted six- and 12-month survival probabilities for the Besançon nomogram were 0.766 (95% CI, 0.715-0.816) and 0.698 (95% CI, 0.641-0.754), respectively. The calibration plot showed that the observed six-month survival probability was close to the diagonal line, while that for 12-month survival deviated below the diagonal line compared to the survival probability predicted by the Besançon nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the Besançon nomogram tended to over-estimate the 12-month survival probability, our study demonstrated that the nomogram is a reliable and readily applicable model to estimate survival outcomes of aPDAC patients receiving L2 chemotherapy.

Liposomal irinotecan in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma in Asian patients: Subgroup analysis of the NAPOLI-1 study

The global, randomized NAPOLI‐1 phase 3 trial reported a survival benefit with liposomal irinotecan (nal‐IRI) plus 5‐fluorouracil/leucovorin (nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV) in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) after previous gemcitabine‐based therapy. Median overall survival (OS) with nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV was 6.1 vs 4.2 months with 5‐FU/LV alone (unstratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.67, P = .012). Herein, we report efficacy and safety results from a post‐hoc subgroup analysis of Asian patients treated at Asian centers. Primary study endpoint was OS; secondary endpoints included progression‐free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Patients receiving nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV (n = 34) had significantly longer median OS versus 5‐FU/LV (n = 35) (8.9 vs 3.7 months; unstratified HR = 0.51, P = .025). Patients had significantly increased median PFS with nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV versus 5‐FU/LV (4.0 vs 1.4; unstratified HR = 0.48, P = .011), and increased ORR (8.8% vs 0; P = .114). nal‐IRI monotherapy (n = 50) numerically improved efficacy endpoints versus 5‐FU/LV (n = 48): median OS was 5.8 versus 4.3 months (HR = 0.83, P = .423) and median PFS was 2.8 versus 1.4 months (HR = 0.69, P = .155). Grade ≥3 neutropenia was reported more frequently with nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV versus 5‐FU/LV (54.5% vs 3.4%), and incidence of grade ≥3 diarrhea was comparable between the two arms (3.0% vs 6.9%). This subgroup analysis confirms nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV as an efficacious treatment option that improves survival in Asian patients with mPDAC that progressed after gemcitabine‐based therapy, with a safety profile agreeing with previous findings. The nal‐IRI+5‐FU/LV regimen should represent a new standard of care for these patients in Asia. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01494506)

Paradigm Shifting of Systemic Chemotherapy for Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer in Japan

Systemic chemotherapy plays an important role in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, to improve the survival of patients with pancreatic cancer. Unresectable pancreatic cancer can be classified into three categories: metastatic, locally advanced, and hereditary pancreatic cancers. Furthermore, the second-line chemotherapy is required to prolong the survival. The combined regimens of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GEM plus nab-PTX) have been recognized as the standard of care for advanced pancreatic cancer. However, the consensus of selection of the first-line chemotherapy still remains. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) between FOLFIRINOX and GEM plus nab-PTX are ongoing for locally advanced and metastatic disease in Japan, respectively. Hereditary pancreatic cancer, especially associated with BRCA mutations, is responsive to platinum-containing regimens and/or poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. It is becoming more important to examine the presence/absence of BRCA mutations to select the appropriate treatment strategy for individual patients. Although some S-1-based regimens have been investigated in the second-line treatment after GEM-based chemotherapy in Japan, no regime demonstrated survival benefit. Nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus FF has been established as the standard of care in the second-line treatment in a global phase III trial (NAPOLI-1). A randomized phase II trial comparing FF plus nal-IRI with FF alone was also conducted in Japan to examine the efficacy and safety of the FF plus nal-IRI in Japanese patients.