Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

Head-to-head comparison of treatment sequences in advanced pancreatic cancer-Real-world data from the prospective German TPK clinical cohort study

There are no clear guidelines regarding the optimal treatment sequence for advanced pancreatic cancer, as head-to-head phase III randomised trials are missing. We assess real-world effectiveness of three common sequential treatment strategies by emulating a hypothetical randomised trial. This analysis included 1551 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from the prospective, clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Pancreatic Cancer receiving FOLFIRINOX (n = 613) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GEMNAB; n = 938) as palliative first-line treatment. We used marginal structural modelling to compare overall survival (OS) and time to deterioration (TTD) of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between three common first- to second-line treatment sequences, adjusting for time-varying potential confounding. The sequences were: FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB, GEMNAB→FOLFOX/OFF and GEMNAB→nanoliposomal irinotecan (NALIRI) + 5-fluorouracil. Outcome was also calculated stratified by patients' prognostic risk according to the Pancreatic Cancer Score. Median OS and TTD of HRQoL independent of risk were 10.7 [8.9, 11.9] and 6.4 [4.8, 7.7] months for FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB, 8.4 [7.4, 9.7] and 5.8 [4.6, 7.1] months for GEMNAB→FOLFOX/OFF and 8.9 [7.8, 10.4] and 4.6 [4.1, 6.1] months for GEMNAB→NALIRI+5-fluorouracil. Compared to FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB, OS and TTD were worse for poor-risk patients with GEMNAB→FOLFOX/OFF (OS: HR 2.09 [1.47, 2.98]; TTD: HR 1.97 [1.19, 3.27]) and those with GEMNAB→NALIRI+5-fluorouracil (OS: HR 1.35, [0.76, 2.39]; TTD: HR 2.62 [1.56, 4.42]). Brackets denote 95%-confidence intervals. The estimated real-world effectiveness of the three treatment sequences evaluated were largely comparable. Poor-risk patients might benefit from intensified treatment with FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB in terms of clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Future randomised trials on sequential treatments in advanced pancreatic cancer are warranted.

Synergistic effect of additional anlotinib and immunotherapy as second-line or later-line treatment in pancreatic cancer: A retrospective cohort study

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is in urgent need of a second-line or later-line treatment strategy. We aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of additional anlotinib, specifically anlotinib in combination with immunotherapy, in patients with PDAC who have failed first-line therapy.

Methods

Patients with pathological diagnosis of PDAC were additionally treated with anlotinib, and some patients were treated with anti-PD-1 agents at the same time, which could be retrospectively analyzed. The efficacy and safety of additional anlotinib were evaluated.

Results

A total of 23 patients were included. In patients treated with additional anlotinib, the overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 1.8 months and the median overall survival (OS) was 6.3 months, regardless of anti-PD-1 agents. Among patients receiving additional anlotinib in combination with anti-PD-1 agents, median PFS and OS were 1.8 and 6.5 months, respectively. Adverse events (AEs) were observed in 16 patients (69.6%). In patients treated with additional anlotinib, the majority of AEs were grade 1-3. Univariate analysis revealed that patients with baseline red blood cell distribution width (RDW) <14% treated with additional anlotinib plus anti-PD-1 agents had significantly longer OS than patients with baseline RDW ≥14% (p = 0.025). Patients with additional anlotinib plus anti-PD-1 agents as second-line therapy had a longer OS than those treated as later-line therapy (p = 0.012). Multivariate analysis showed that baseline RDW was the only independent risk factor for OS (p = 0.042).

Conclusion

The combination of anlotinib and immunotherapy represents an effective add-on therapy with tolerable AEs as second- or later-line therapy in patients with PDAC, particularly in patients with baseline RDW <14%.

Clinical outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a real-world study

OBJECTIVE

Little progress has been made in recent years using first-line chemotherapy, including gemcitabine combined with nab-paclitaxel, FOLFIRINOX, and NALIRIFOX, for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (APC). In addition, the optimal second-line chemotherapy regimen has not been determined. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of different types of second-line chemotherapy for APC.

METHODS

Patients with APC who received first-line treatment from January 2008 to January 2021 were considered eligible for this retrospective analysis. The primary and secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively.

RESULTS

Four hundred and thirty-seven and 617 patients were treated with 5-fluorouracil- and gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment, respectively. Demographic and clinical features, except age and liver metastasis, were comparable between the two groups (P < 0.05). The median OS was 8.8 and 7.8 months in patients who received a 5-fluorouracil- and gemcitabine-based combined regimen for first-line therapy, respectively (HR = 1.244, 95% CI = 1.090-1.419; P < 0.001). The median OS was 5.6 and 1.9 months in patients who received second-line chemotherapy and supportive care, respectively (HR = 0.766, 95% CI = 0.677-0.867; P < 0.001). The median PFS was not significantly differently between gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil monotherapy and combination therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

A 5-fluorouracil- or gemcitabine-based combined regimen was shown to be as effective as a single 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine regimen as second-line therapy for patients with APC.

Impact of previous S-1 treatment on efficacy of liposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Liposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV) provides survival benefits for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) refractory to gemcitabine-based treatment, mainly gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA), in current practice. Gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) is another commonly administered first-line regimen before nab-paclitaxel reimbursement; however, the efficacy and safety of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV for mPDAC after failed GS treatment has not been reported and was therefore explored in this study.

METHODS

In total, 177 patients with mPDAC received first-line GS or GA treatment, followed by second-line nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV treatment (identified from a multicenter retrospective cohort in Taiwan from 2018 to 2020); 85 and 92 patients were allocated to the GS and GA groups, respectively. Overall survival (OS), time-to-treatment failure (TTF), and adverse events were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics of the two groups were generally similar; however, a higher median age (67 versus 62 years, p < 0.001) and fewer liver metastases (52% versus 78%, p < 0.001) were observed in the GS versus GA group. The median OS was 15.0 and 15.9 months in the GS and GA groups, respectively (p = 0.58). The TTF (3.1 versus 2.8 months, p = 0.36) and OS (7.6 versus 6.7 months, p = 0.83) after nal-IRI treatment were similar between the two groups. More patients in the GS group developed mucositis during nal-IRI treatment (15% versus 4%, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of second-line nal-IRI +5-FU/LV treatment was unaffected by prior S-1 exposure. GS followed by nal-IRI treatment is an alternative treatment sequence for patients with mPDAC.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Solute carrier family 16 member 1 as a potential prognostic factor for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and its influence on tumor immunity

Background

Solute carrier family 16 member 1 (SLC16A1) serves as a biomarker in numerous types of cancer. Tumor immune infiltration has drawn increasing attention in cancer progression and treatment. The objective of our study was to explore the association between SLC16A1 and the tumor immune microenvironment in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

Data were obtained from The Cancer Genome Atlas. The xCell web tool was used to calculate the proportion of immune cells according to SLC16A1 expression. To further explore the mechanism of SLC16A1, immunity-related genes were screened from differentially expressed genes through weighted gene coexpression network analysis, examined via Gene Ontology and Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes analyses, and filtrated using univariate Cox regression and least absolute shrinkage and selection operator regression model combined correlation analysis (P<0.05). Next, CIBERSORT was used to analyze the correlation between immune cells and five important genes. SLC16A1 expression and its clinical role in pancreatic cancer was clarified via immunohistochemical staining experiments. Finally, the effects of SLC16A1 on the results of cancer immunity were evaluated by in vitro experiments.

Results

SLC16A1 was overexpressed in PDAC tissues and could be an independent prognostic factor. SLC16A1 was significantly negatively correlated with overall survival and suppressed the tumor immunity of PDAC. In clinic, SLC16A1 expression was significantly positively correlated with tumor progression and poor prognosis. We also found that SLC16A1 could suppress the antitumor ability of CD8+ T cells.

Conclusions

SLC16A1 is a biomarker for the prognosis of PDAC and can influence the immune environment of PDAC. These findings provide new insights into the treatment of PDAC.

Survival outcome of different treatment sequences in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite some therapeutic advances, improvement in survival rates of unresectable and/or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been minimal over recent decade. We aimed to evaluate the impact of different treatment sequences on clinical outcomes of advanced PDAC at our academic institution.

METHODS

In this single institution retrospective analysis, we assessed characteristics and survival rates of unresectable and/or metastatic pancreatic PDAC patients who started a systemic treatment between 01/2015 and 12/2021. Survival analyses were performed by Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

The number of 285 patients received at least two lines of treatment, but only 137 patients were suitable for third-line treatment. Subgroup analysis showed that thirty-seven patients received A line (gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel combined therapy to FOLFIRINOX) therapy, 37 patients received B line (nab-paclitaxel combined therapy to gemcitabine combined therapy to FOLFIRINOX) therapy, 21 patients received C line (nab-paclitaxel combined therapy to gemcitabine combined therapy to oxaliplatin or irinotecan combined therapy) therapy. Survival rates for different treatment lines were significantly different and median overall survival (OS) was 14.00, 18.00, and 14.00 months, respectively (p<0.05).

CONCLUSION

Our study provides real-world evidence for the effectiveness of different treatment sequences and underscores the treatment sequences on survival outcome when considering the entire management in advanced PDAC.