Raltitrexed-eloxatin salvage chemotherapy in gemcitabine-resistant metastatic pancreatic cancer

Raltitrexed Enhances the Antitumor Effect of Apatinib in Human Esophageal Squamous Carcinoma Cells via Akt and Erk Pathways

Objective

Apatinib has been proved effective in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer and a variety of solid tumors. Raltitrexed is emerging as a promising alternative for treating advanced colorectal cancer in China. This work aims to study the combinatory antitumor effect of apatinib and raltitrexed on human esophageal squamous carcinoma cells (ESCC).

Materials and Methods

Two VEGFR-2-positive human ESCC lines, KYSE-30 and TE-1, were treated with apatinib or raltitrexed, or both, then the cell proliferation rate was measured by MTS assay; cell migration and invasion were studied by transwell assays; cell apoptosis rate was determined by flow cytometry; cellular autophagy level affected was analyzed by Western blot analysis; finally, quantitative polymerase chain reaction (qPCR) was used to monitor transcription and Western blot was performed to check phosphorylation of apoptotic proteins after treatment.

Results

Both apatinib and raltitrexed significantly inhibited KYSE-30 and TE-1 cell proliferation in a dose-dependent manner. Treatment with both drugs showed enhanced inhibitory effects on cell proliferation, migration, and invasiveness compared with apatinib monotherapy. Apoptosis percentages in both cell lines were also remarkably increased by the combined treatment. Moreover, the combination of apatinib and raltitrexed down-regulated mRNA level of the anti-apoptotic protein Bcl-2, while up-regulated pro-apoptotic protein PARP, Bax, and caspase-3 transcription. Western blot analysis showed that phosphorylation levels of Erk, Akt, and invasiveness-associated protein matrix metalloproteinases-9 (MMP-9) were decreased in the combination group.

Conclusion

Taken together, these results indicate that raltitrexed enhances the antitumor effects of apatinib on human ESCC cells by down-regulating phosphorylation of Akt and Erk, implying a combination of raltitrexed and apatinib might be an effective option for treating esophageal squamous cell carcinoma patients.

Formulation of Folate-Modified Raltitrexed-Loaded Nanoparticles for Colorectal Cancer Theranostics

Multifunctional nanoparticles (NPs) that enable the imaging of drug delivery and facilitate cancer cell uptake are potentially powerful tools in tailoring oncologic treatments. Here we report the development of a layer-by-layer (LbL) formulation of folic acid (FA) and folate antimetabolites that have been well-established for enhanced tumor uptake and as potent chemotherapeutics, respectively. To investigate the uptake of LbL coated NPs, we deposited raltitrexed (RTX) or combined RTX-FA on fluorescent polystyrene NPs. The performance of these NP formulations was evaluated with CT26 murine colorectal cancer (CRC) cells in vitro and in vivo to examine both uptake and cytotoxicity against CRC. Fluorescence microscopy and flow cytometry indicated an increased accumulation of the coated NP formulations versus bare NPs. Ex vivo near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging of major organs suggested the majority of NPs accumulated in the liver, which is typical of a majority of NP formulations. Imaging of the CRC tumors alone showed a higher average fluorescence from NPs accumulated in animals treated with the coated NPs, with the majority of RTX NP-treated animals showing the consistently-highest mean tumoral accumulation. Overall, these results contribute to the development of LbL formulations in CRC theranostic applications.

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.

Second-line therapy in advanced upper gastrointestinal cancers: current status and new prospects

The prognosis of patients with advanced upper gastrointestinal cancers (UGC) remains poor. Current available systemic armamentarium is limited, and little progress has been made over the last decades. Main achievements have been obtained in first-line setting, however an increasingly proportion of patients are considered for second-line therapy, although data from randomized trials are scarce or even lacking. In this comprehensive review we examine the literature to summarize the efficacy and limitations of second-line systemic options in patients with advanced UGC, with a glimpse into the innovations.

Use of gemcitabine as a second-line treatment following chemotherapy with folfirinox for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

There is a lack of prospective data about second-line treatments for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients. This is partially due to recent changes in first-line chemotherapy treatments. Despite this dearth of information, 50.0% of the patients who experience failure with first-line folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin (folfirinox) treatment are eligible for additional chemotherapy. In this setting, gemcitabine is widely used without any standard recommendations available. The present study evaluated 42 patients who received gemcitabine subsequent to a first-line treatment of folfirinox between January 2008 and December 2012 at the Centre Léon Bérard (Lyon, France). Clinical data, biological data and tumor characteristics were retrospectively analyzed to identify prognostic factors for successful treatment with gemcitabine. In total, 11 patients (26.2%) experienced control of their cancer with gemcitabine treatment. However, there was no predictive marker for their response to the drug. The median overall survival was 3.6 months from gemcitabine initiation [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.1-5.1]. The median length of gemcitabine treatment was 1.5 months (95% CI, 0.3-13.3). Among the 11 patients who were successfully treated with gemcitabine, 6 were resistant to first-line folfirinox treatment. Patients who were non responsive to folfirinox had a higher probability of success with gemcitabine compared with patients that responded to folfirinox (54.5 vs. 21.4%, respectively; P=0.061). The present study did not identify any clinical or biological marker with a predictive value for successful gemcitabine treatment. Furthermore, successful gemcitabine treatment was not correlated with patients' response to first-line folfirinox treatment. This suggests an absence of cross-resistance in the chemotherapy protocols and provides evidence for effective cancer treatment with the second-line gemcitabine therapy.

Second-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: Which is the best option?

Despite recent biological insight and therapeutic advances, the prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer still remains poor. For more than 15 years, gemcitabine monotherapy has been the cornerstone of first-line treatment. Recently, prospective randomized trials have shown that novel upfront combination regimens tested in prospective randomized trials have resulted in improved patients' outcome increasing the proportion of putative candidate to second-line therapy. There is no definite standard of care after disease progression. A novel formulation in which irinotecan is encapsulated into liposomal-based nanoparticles may increase the efficacy of the drug without incrementing its toxicity. NAPOLI-1 was the first randomized trial to compare nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil-leucovorin (5-FU/LV) to 5-FU/LV alone after a gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. This review focuses on the current data for the management of second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, presents the most interesting ongoing clinical trials and illustrates the biologically-driven future options beyond disease progression.

Raltitrexed Inhibits HepG2 Cell Proliferation via G0/G1 Cell Cycle Arrest

Raltitrexed (RTX) is an antimetabolite drug used as a chemotherapeutic agent for treating colorectal cancer, malignant mesothelioma, and gastric cancer. The antitumor capacity of RTX is attributed to its inhibitory activity on thymidylate synthase (TS), a key enzyme in the synthesis of DNA precursors. The current study is aimed at investigating the potential antitumor effects of RTX in liver cancer. Using the HepG2 cell line as an in vitro model of liver cancer, we evaluated the effects of RTX on cell proliferation employing both a WST-8 assay and a clone formation efficiency assay. In addition, we monitored the ultrastructure changes of HepG2 cells in response to RTX with transmission electric microscopy. To investigate the mechanism underlying the regulation of cell proliferation by RTX, we analyzed cell cycle using cell flow cytometry. Moreover, real-time PCR and Western blot analyses were conducted to examine expression levels of cell cycle regulatory proteins cyclin A and cyclin-dependent kinase 2 (CDK2), as well as their mediators tumor suppressor genes p53 and p16. Our results demonstrate that RTX inhibits HepG2 proliferation by arresting the cell cycle at G₀/G₁. This cell cycle arrest function was mediated via downregulation of cyclin A and CDK2. The observed elevated expression of p53 and p16 by RTX may contribute to the reduction of cyclin A/CDK2. Our study indicates that RTX could serve as a potential chemotherapeutic agent in the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Pancreatic cancer: New hopes after first line treatment

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Extensive research has yielded advances in first-line treatment strategies, but there is no standardized second-line therapy. In this review, we examine the literature trying to establish a possible therapeutic algorithm.

Phase II trial of salvage therapy with trabectedin in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

No standard salvage chemotherapy has been identified for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA), and there is an urgent need for active agents against this disease. This phase II trial explored the activity of trabectedin in mPA progressing after gemcitabine-based first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with gemcitabine-resistant disease received trabectedin 1.3 mg/m(2) as a 3-h intravenous continuous infusion every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or for a maximum of 6 months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS-6). Since trabectedin modulates the production of selected inflammatory mediators, this study also aimed to identify inflammatory biomarkers predictive for response to trabectedin.

RESULTS

Between February 2011 and February 2012, 25 patients received trabectedin. PFS-6 was 4%, median PFS 1.9 months (range 0.8-7.4), and median overall survival 5.2 months (range 1.1-24.3). Grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 44% of patients, febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia both in 12%, anemia in 8%, fatigue in 12%, and AST and ALT increase in 8 and 4%, respectively. Trabectedin was shown to modulate the production of inflammatory mediators, and at disease progression, levels of a subgroup of cytokines/chemokines were modified. Furthermore, tissue analysis identified 30 genes associated with better prognosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Although it has shown some ability to modulate inflammatory process, single-agent trabectedin had no activity as salvage therapy for mPA.

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

There remains uncertainty regarding the optimal second-line chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The current recommendation of 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin may not be relevant in current practice, as FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin) has become a more popular first line therapy in fit patients. The majority of studies in this setting are single-arm Phase II trials with significant heterogeneity of patient populations, treatments and outcomes. In this review, we sought to systematically review and synthesise all prospective data available for the second-line treatment of advanced PDAC.

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

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

FOLFOX as second-line chemotherapy in patients with pretreated metastatic pancreatic cancer from the FIRGEM study

Background

FOLFOX second-line treatment seems to be a validated option for patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) progressing after gemcitabine chemotherapy. However, other therapeutics strategy has developed in first-line therapy, as the FIRGEM phase II study that evaluated gemcitabine alone versus FOLFIRI.3 alternating with gemcitabine every two months. The present study assessed the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX after failure of the first-line therapy used in the FIRGEM study.

Methods

In this prospective observational cohort study, we analysed all consecutive patients who received second-line chemotherapy with FOLFOX among 98 patients with metastatic PC included in the FIRGEM study. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were estimated from the start of second-line chemotherapy using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Results

Among 46 patients who received second-line chemotherapy, 27 patients (male, 55%; median age, 61 years; performance status (PS) 0–1, 44%) were treated with FOLFOX after progression to first-line gemcitabine alone (n = 20) or FOLFIRI.3 alternating with gemcitabine (n = 7). Grade 3 toxicity was observed in 33% of patients (no grade 4 toxicity). At the end of follow-up, all patients had progressed and 25 had died. No objective response was observed, and disease control rate was 36%. Median PFS and OS were 1.7 and 4.3 months, respectively. In multivariate analysis, PS was the only independent prognostic factor. For patients PS 0–1 versus 2–3, median PFS was 3.0 versus 1.2 months (log rank, p = 0.002), and median OS was 5.9 versus 2.6 months (log rank, p = 0.001).

Conclusions

This study suggests that FOLFOX second-line therapy offered interesting efficacy results with an acceptable toxicity profile in metastatic PC patients with a good PS.

High expression of erythropoietin-producing hepatoma cell line-B2 (EphB2) predicts the efficiency of the Qingyihuaji formula treatment in pancreatic cancer CFPAC-1 cells through the EphrinB1-EphB2 pathway

Our previous study demonstrated that inhibition of erythropoietin-producing hepatoma cell line-B2 (EphB2) expression resulted in the promotion of cancer growth, with EphB2 acting as a tumor suppressor in pancreatic cancer. Qingyihuaji formula (QYHJ), a traditional Chinese medicine, acts as an independent protective factor for pancreatic cancer patient survival and different patients have shown various responses to QYHJ treatment. In the current study, the different effects on tumor growth inhibition following QYHJ treatment in cells with different levels of EphB2 expression were investigated to reveal the mechanism. A subcutaneously transplanted tumor model using cancer cells with different levels of EphB2 expression were established in vivo and received a four-week QYHJ intervention. Tumor weight inhibitory rate and tumor volume deflation were evaluated. The cell cycle and apoptosis were analyzed by flow cytometry, and reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction and western blot analysis were used to assess mRNA and protein levels. The results showed that the tumor weight inhibitory rate was 31.40, 31.33 and 18.36% in CFPAC-1, CFPAC-1 control RNAi and CFPAC-1 EphB2 RNAi cells following QYHJ treatment, respectively. A statistically significant difference was identified in CFPAC-1 (P<0.05) and CFPAC-1 control RNAi (P<0.01) cells. In addition, a statistically significant increase was identified in the G0/G1 phase population (P<0.05) and a statistically significant decrease was identified in the S phase population (P<0.05) in CFPAC-1 and CFPAC-1 control RNAi cells; however, no significant difference was identified in the CFPAC-1 EphB2 RNAi cells following QYHJ treatment. QYHJ upregulated the mRNA and protein level of Eph receptor-interacting B1 (EphrinB1) in the cells that were expressing different levels of EphB2, however, QYHJ did not regulate EphB2 expression. In CFPAC-1 and CFPAC-1 control RNAi cells, the QYHJ treatment resulted in a statistically significant decrease in cyclin-dependent kinase 6 (CDK6) mRNA (P<0.05) and protein (P<0.05) levels. The high expression of EphB2 predicted the superior response rate to the QYHJ treatment through a mechanism of inhibiting the cell cycle by an EphrinB1-EphB2-induced CDK6 decrease in CFPAC-1 cells. Therefore, EphB2 acts as a predictive factor for QYHJ treatment in pancreatic cancer CFPAC-1 cells.

Beyond first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: an expanding array of therapeutic options?

While an increasing number of therapeutic options are now available for the first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, the optimal choice for treatment in the second-line setting and beyond is less well defined. A variety of cytotoxic agents, either alone or in combination, have been evaluated, although primarily in the context of small single-arm or retrospective studies. Most regimens have been associated with median progression-free survival rates in the range of 2-4 mo and overall survival rates between 4-8 mo, highlighting the very poor prognosis of patients who are candidates for such treatment. Targeted therapies studied in this chemotherapy-refractory setting, meanwhile, have produced even worse efficacy results. In the current article, we review the clinical evidence for treatment of refractory disease, primarily in patients who have progressed on front-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. In the process, we highlight the limitations of the available data to date as well as some of the challenges in designing appropriate clinical trials in this salvage setting, including how to select an appropriate control arm given the absence of a well-established reference standard, and the importance of incorporating predictive biomarkers and quality of life measures whenever possible into study design.

Second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: a comprehensive analysis of published clinical trials

BACKGROUND

There is currently no standard of care for the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. The aim of this analysis was to compare the different therapeutic approaches in this setting.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic analysis of second-line studies in advanced pancreatic cancer that have progressed on or following gemcitabine and published or presented from 2000 to 2012.

RESULTS

Forty-four clinical trials (t) were identified; of which 34 met the inclusion criteria treating an aggregate total of 1503 patients (n). Patients who received treatments (t: 33; n: 1269) had a median overall survival (OS) of 6 months compared with 2.8 months for patients who received best supportive care only (t: 2; n: 234) (P = 0.013). The gemcitabine and platinum-based combination (t: 5; n: 154) provided a median progression-free survival and OS of 4 and 6 months compared with 1.6 and 5.3 for the rest of the regimens (t: 29; n: 1349) (P = 0.059 and 0.10, respectively) and 2.9 and 5.7 for the combination of 5-fluorouracil and platinum agents (t: 12; n: 450) (P = 0.60 and 0.22, respectively).

CONCLUSION(S)

Although not conclusive, these data showed that the advantage of second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer is very limited and there is a need for more studies.

Role of taxanes in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most deadly cancers and is characterized by a poor prognosis. Single agent gemcitabine, despite its limited activity and modest impact on disease outcome, is considered as the standard therapy in pancreatic cancer. Most of the combination regimens used in the treatment of this disease, also including the targeted agents, did not improve the outcome of patients. Also, taxanes have been tested as single agent and in combination chemotherapy, both in first line and as salvage chemotherapy, as another possible option for treating pancreatic cancer. The inclusion of taxanes in combination with gemcitabine as upfront therapy obtained promising results. Accordingly, taxanes, and above all, new generation taxanes, appear to be suitable candidates for further testing to assess their role against pancreatic cancer in various clinical settings.

Lentivirus-mediated overexpression of TGF-β inducible early gene 1 inhibits SW1990 pancreatic cancer cell growth

TIEG1 (TGF-β inducible early gene 1) plays a significant role in regulating cell proliferation and apoptosis in various cell types. Previous studies have shown a close relationship between the expression level of TIEG1 and various cancers, including breast, prostate, colorectal and pancreatic cancer. In this study, we up-regulated the gene expression of TIEG1 in SW1990 pancreatic cancer cell line by a lentivirus transfection system and investigated its potential as a therapeutic target for pancreatic cancer. The results showed that lentivirus-mediated overexpression of TIEG1 gene inhibited human pancreatic cancer SW1990 cell proliferation and caused the cell cycle arrest at the G1-phase in vitro. SW1990 cells transduced with lenti-TIEG1 showed significant inhibition of colony formation and cancer cell growth in 3-D culture model. Moreover, overexpression of TIEG1 gene significantly slowed the growth of SW1990 xenografts in nude mice. Taken together, these data provided evidence that overexpression of TIEG1 gene by a lentivirus transfection system led to suppressed human pancreatic cancer cell growth and might therefore be a feasible approach in the clinical management of pancreatic cancer.

5-fluorouracil/leucovorin combined with irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of irinotecan and oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (FU) and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as second-line therapy in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the medical records of 27 patients with MPA treated with FOLFIRINOX as second-line therapy between January 2003 and November 2009 in our hospital. The recommended schedule was oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 + irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) on day 1 + leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) on day 1 followed by FU 400 mg/m(2) as a bolus on day 1 and 2,400 mg/m(2) as 46-hour continuous infusion biweekly.

RESULTS

The median age of the 27 patients (13 males and 14 females) was 63 years (45-83). All patients had progressive disease after first-line chemotherapy by gemcitabine. A total of 167 cycles were administered, with a median number of 6 cycles (1-29) per patient. One toxic death occurred (sepsis). Tolerance of treatment was acceptable, and the relative dose density delivered per patient was 92.8% for oxaliplatin, 89.1% for irinotecan and 96.4% for FU. Grade 3-4 neutropenia occurred in 55.6% of the patients, including 1 febrile neutropenia. The other toxicities were manageable. Regarding efficacy, 22 of the 27 patients were evaluable (WHO and RECIST criteria). Five patients had partial responses and 12 stable disease, resulting in an overall disease control rate of 63%. Median time to progression was 5.4 months (0.7-25.48), and median event-free survival was 3 months (0.5-24.9). Median overall survival was 8.5 months (0-26). A clinical benefit was reported for 55% of the patients.

CONCLUSIONS

These results confirmed the good safety profile and the efficacy of the FOLFIRINOX regimen as second-line treatment of MPA.

Overcoming drug resistance in pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer has the worst survival rate of all cancers. The current standard care for metastatic pancreatic cancer is gemcitabine, however, the success of this treatment is poor and overall survival has not improved for decades. Drug resistance (both intrinsic and acquired) is thought to be a major reason for the limited benefit of most pancreatic cancer therapies.

AREAS COVERED

Previous studies have indicated various mechanisms of drug resistance in pancreatic cancer, including changes in individual genes or signaling pathways, the influence of the tumor microenvironment, and the presence of highly resistant stem cells. This review summarizes recent advances in the mechanisms of drug resistance in pancreatic cancer and potential strategies to overcome this.

EXPERT OPINION

Increasing drug delivery efficiency and decreasing drug resistance is the current aim in pancreatic cancer treatment, and will also benefit the treatment of other cancers. Understanding the molecular and cellular basis of drug resistance in pancreatic cancer will lead to the development of novel therapeutic strategies with the potential to sensitize pancreatic cancer to chemotherapy, and to increase the efficacy of current treatments in a wide variety of human cancers.

Systematic review: quality of life after treatment for upper gastrointestinal cancer

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this systematic review is to scrutinize and summarize the design, conduct and reporting standards of articles recently published describing health-related quality of life (HRQL) outcomes of treatment of upper gastrointestinal cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Some 2312 abstracts were published between January and July 2009 and initial elimination of papers reduced this number to 22 articles. Of these, 17 were judged to have robust HRQL methodology, but a further seven were excluded due to a high risk of bias in the study design. Ten articles (four randomized trials) were finally included in the review. Studies in curative treatments for oesophagogastric cancer show that surgery and chemoradiation therapy has a major short-term detrimental effect on HRQL, but recovery occurs within 6 months in long-term survivors but those not achieving a survival benefit report very poor HRQL. In advanced oesophageal cancer, 18 mm self-expandable metal stents and nonstent therapies lead to better short-term HRQL scores than nonexpandable stents and are the recommended standard of care. A small survival advantage and improved HRQL is conferred by adjuvant and palliative gemcitabine chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer.

SUMMARY

This review identified few well-designed studies that also included a robust assessment of HRQL. High-quality trials with reliable HRQL methods are required for outcomes to inform health policy and clinical decision-making.

Best supportive care (BSC) versus oxaliplatin, folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil (OFF) plus BSC in patients for second-line advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III-study from the German CONKO-study group

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine usually given until progressive disease (PD) is the main first-line treatment option for patients with inoperable advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). Currently there is no accepted active regimen for second-line chemotherapy. Previous phase II studies suggest clinical relevant activity of oxaliplatin, folinic acid and 5-FU (OFF). We initiated a phase III multicentre study comparing OFF versus best supportive care (BSC) in patients with APC progressing while on gemcitabine therapy.

METHODS

In this open randomized study, patients with CT and/or MRI confirmed progressive disease while on gemcitabine therapy were randomized 1:1 to OFF or BSC. Stratification included duration of first-line therapy (<3, 3 to 6 and >6 months), performance status (KPS 70-80%; 90-100%) and tumour stage (M1/M0). OFF consisted of folinic acid 200mg/m(2) followed by 5-fluorouracil 2g/m(2) (24h) on d1, d8, d15, d22 and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m(2) on days 8 and 22. After a rest of 3 weeks the next cycle was started on d43. A total of 165 patients were calculated to demonstrate a doubling of survival time after progression on first-line therapy.

RESULTS

After inclusion of forty six patients the trial was terminated according to predefined protocol regulations due to insufficient accrual (lack of acceptance of BSC by patients and physicians. Patient characteristics were well balanced between both study arms. The OFF regimen was well tolerated with more patients with grade I/II paraesthesia and grade II/III nausea/emesis and diarrhoea. Median second-line survival was 4.82 [95% Confidence Interval; 4.29-5.35] months for OFF treatment and 2.30 [95% CI; 1.76-2.83] months with BSC alone (0.45 [95% CI: 0.24-0.83], p = 0.008). Median overall survival for the sequence GEM-OFF was 9.09 [95% CI: 6.97-11.21] and 7.90 [95% CI: 4.95-10.84] months for GEM-BSC (0.50 [95% CI: 0.27-0.95], p = 0.031) respectively.

INTERPRETATION

Although stopped prematurely, this randomized trial provides at first time evidence for the benefit of second-line chemotherapy as compared to BSC alone for patients with APC. OFF significantly prolonged survival time compared to BSC alone after failure of first-line therapy with gemcitabine.

Salvage therapy with mitomycin and ifosfamide in patients with gemcitabine-resistant metastatic pancreatic cancer: a phase II trial

BACKGROUND

At the time of upfront treatment failure, over half of the patients with advanced pancreatic cancer are candidates for further treatment.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic gemcitabine-resistant pancreatic cancer were treated with mitomycin 8 mg/m(2) on day 1, ifosfamide 2,500 mg/m(2) and mesna 3,000 mg/m(2) on days 1-3 every 28 days until progressive disease. A positive responder was defined as a patient who was progression free at 6 months from trial enrollment. According to the Fleming design, a sample size of 34 patients was estimated assuming p0 = 0.05 and p1 = 0.20.

RESULTS

Between May 2006 and December 2007, 21 patients (median age 56 years; median Karnofsky performance score 80) were enrolled. One patient died before receiving any treatment. Eighteen patients interrupted chemotherapy due to progressive disease (n = 15), toxicity (n = 2) or refusal (n = 1). Grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 80% of patients, thrombocytopenia and fatigue in 20% and anemia in 10%. Only 1 patient was progression free at 6 months (5%). One patient had a partial response (5%) and 2 patients had stable disease (10%). Median survival was 3.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Based on the poor outcome observed and on the high level of grade 3-4 toxicity, the trial was prematurely stopped and the mitomycin and ifosfamide regimen was considered insufficiently active in gemcitabine-pretreated advanced pancreatic cancer.

Efficacy of infusional 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and mitomycin-C (iFAM) in the treatment of patients with gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic cancer and analysis of prognostic factors in a salvage setting

PURPOSE

In gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic cancer, salvage chemotherapy has not been established, and the prognostic factors are not completely known. The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and safety of infusional 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), doxorubicin, and mitomycin-C (iFAM) in patients with gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic cancer and to elucidate the prognostic factors.

METHODS

Study eligibility was as follows: (1) 18-75 years of age; (2) relapse within 6 months after adjuvant gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (GBC) or previously treated with palliative GBC; and (3) an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0-2. iFAM consisted of a 5-FU (800 mg/m(2)) infusion over 10 h on days 1-5, doxorubicin (30 mg/m(2)) on day 1, and mitomycin-C (8 mg/m(2)) on day 1 every 4 weeks.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were enrolled. The responses to iFAM included a partial response in 6 patients (10.0%) and stable disease in 8 patients (13.3%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.0-2.8 months) and 6.1 months (95% CI, 4.2-8.0 months), respectively. The 6- and 12-month survival rates were 50.4 and 26.4%, respectively. Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia (3.3%) and thrombocytopenia (3.3%). The ECOG PS was a significant prognostic factor for PFS (P < 0.001) and OS (P = 0.022). An elevated CA 19-9 at the time of initiating iFAM (P = 0.011) was a poor prognostic factor for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

iFAM is an effective and well-tolerated in patients with gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic cancer, even patients with an ECOG PS of 2. ECOG PS and CA 19-9 were shown to be significant prognostic factors in this salvage setting.

Combination 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and cisplatin (LV5FU2-CDDP) followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised strategic phase III trial (FFCD 0301)

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine is the standard chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Although the 5-fluorouracil (5FU), folinic acid and cisplatin combination (LV5FU2-CDDP) is an option, the optimal order of the regimens must be determined. The first strategic phase III trial comparing LV5FU2-CDDP followed by gemcitabine versus gemcitabine followed by LV5FU2-CDDP was conducted.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, performance status (PS) 0-2, without prior chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either LV5FU2-CDDP followed by gemcitabine at disease progression or toxicity (Arm A), or the opposite sequence (Arm B). 202 patients had to be included and 170 deaths had to be observed to detect an expected improvement in median overall survival (OS) from 6.5 to 10 months in Arm A (two-sided α = 5% and β = 20%).

RESULTS

202 patients were included (Arm A, 102; Arm B, 100). Median age, male/female ratio, PS 0-1 and previous surgery were similar in the two arms. After a median follow-up of 44 months, median OS in Arm A was 6.6 months versus 8.0 months in Arm B (p = 0.85). Median progression-free survival was similar between Arms A and B. More grade 3/4 toxicities were observed when LV5FU2-CDDP was administered as a first-line treatment compared with gemcitabine: 79% versus 64% (p = 0.018).

CONCLUSION

This trial did not show any strategic advantage to using LV5FU2-CDDP as a first-line treatment and suggests that gemcitabine remains the standard first-line treatment. Sixty-one per cent of patients were able to receive a second line of chemotherapy.

Weekly Paclitaxel after failure of gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer patients with malignant ascites: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVES

Peritoneal metastasis is one of the major sites of disease progression of pancreatic cancer. There have been few trials in the second-line setting after gemcitabine failure because patients can hardly be candidates for chemotherapy after failure in the first-line chemotherapy, especially those with malignant ascites. The safety and efficacy of weekly paclitaxel therapy was evaluated for pancreatic cancer patients with malignant ascites in this retrospective study.

METHODS

The subjects of this retrospective study were 23 advanced pancreatic cancer patients with malignant ascites who received weekly paclitaxel therapy after gemcitabine failure. Paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2), div. for 1 h) was administered on Days 1, 8 and 15, every 4 weeks.

RESULTS

While the disease control rate was 35%, decrease of ascites was obtained in 30% of the patients and ascites control rate was 61%. The median survival time was 101 days. Toxicities were mild, although one treatment-related death occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Weekly paclitaxel therapy may be useful treatment option for pancreatic cancer patients with malignant ascites after gemcitabine failure.

RNAi targeting EZH2 inhibits tumor growth and liver metastasis of pancreatic cancer in vivo

The function of EZH2 in tumorigenesis and liver metastasis of pancreatic cancer has never been elucidated in vivo. EZH2 was overexpressed in pancreatic carcinomas and its overexpression was associated with tumor differentiation and pT status. Suppression of EZH2 caused a significant growth inhibition of pancreatic cancer cells in vitro and markedly diminished their tumorigenicity in vivo. Knock-down of EZH2 inhibited liver metastasis of pancreatic cancer in vivo. EZH2 has a crucial role in tumor growth and liver metastasis of pancreatic cancer.

Second-line chemotherapy with capecitabine (Xeloda) and docetaxel (Taxotere) in previously treated, unresectable adenocarcinoma of pancreas: the final results of a phase II trial

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and toxicity of the docetaxel and capecitabine combination in patients with previously treated, unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, pre-treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, were treated with capecitabine (800 mg/m(2) orally, twice a day for 14 days) and docetaxel (75 mg/m(2) i.v, on day 1), every 3 weeks. The primary end-point was overall response rate (RR).

RESULTS

Thirty-one patients were enrolled in the study; 93.6% of them had a performance status (PS) of 0-1 and 96.8% had stage IV disease. Patients received a median of 4 cycles/patient, and the main reason for treatment discontinuation was disease progression. Partial response was observed in three (9.7%) patients, stable disease in seven (22.6%) (disease control rate: 32.3%, 95% CI: 15.80-48.71%) and disease progression in 21 (67.6%). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.4 months (95% CI: 1.6-3.13) and the median overall survival (OS) was 6.3 months (95% CI: 3.38-9.23); the estimated 1-year survival rate was 14.7%. Grade III/IV neutropenia occurred in 10 (32.2%) patients and febrile neutropenia in one patient. Other severe non-hematologic toxicities were mild and manageable. After 2 chemotherapy cycles, pain control occurred in 20% of patients and stabilization of body weight in 40%.

CONCLUSION

The combination of docetaxel/capecitabine may confer good disease control associated with improvement of quality of life as second-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Systemic therapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Systemic treatment of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma achieves only modest benefits, with evidence indicating a survival advantage with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) over best supportive care alone, and further advantage of single-agent gemcitabine over 5-FU. There are very few regimens better than single-agent gemcitabine despite multiple trials of cytotoxic and targeted agents. The addition of a platinum agent has improved response rate but not survival. The addition of erlotinib has improved survival but only by a small margin. The use of gemcitabine in multidrug regimens containing one or more of: a platinum agent; fluoropyrimidine; anthracycline; and taxane has demonstrated advantages in response rate, progression-free survival and, in one randomized study, overall survival. After gemcitabine failure, second-line therapy with oxaliplatin and 5-FU provides a further survival advantage. Further advances depend upon the current and future clinical trials investigating enhanced delivery of current agents, new agents and novel modalities, improved supportive care, and treatment more tailored to the individual patient and tumour.

S-1 monotherapy as second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine failure

OBJECTIVE

No standard salvage chemotherapy regimen has been established for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of gemcitabine-based treatment. Although a Phase II study of S-1 monotherapy was conducted in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer, the number of patients enrolled was small.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 84 consecutive patients who received S-1 monotherapy as a second-line treatment after gemcitabine failure at the Shizuoka Cancer Center between May 2004 and April 2008. The selection criteria in this study were age 20-75 years, ECOG performance status <or=2 and preserved organ functions. S-1 was administered orally twice a day at a dose of 40 mg/m(2) for 28 days, followed by 14-day rest.

RESULTS

Fifty-two patients were selected for the analysis. Out of the 47/52 patients with measurable lesions, only 2 patients (4%) showed a partial response and 15 patients (32%) showed stable disease. The median progression-free survival was 2.1 months and the median overall survival was 5.8 months, with a 1-year survival rate of 12%. The common grade 3/4 toxicities were diarrhea (8%), anorexia (6%), fatigue (6%), anemia (6%) and leucopenia (4%).

CONCLUSIONS

S-1 monotherapy is marginally effective and well tolerated in the second-line setting in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

Second- and third-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: feasibility and potential benefits in a retrospective series of 117 patients

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy is effective in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC), but the benefits of second- and third-line chemotherapy remain unclear.

METHODS

We studied all patients followed consecutively for metastatic PAC, and registered at our institution between 1997 and 2006. We retrospectively analyzed the following data in terms of chemotherapy: tumor response; time to tumor progression (TTP) for each line; and overall survival (OS). Efficacy of second-line regimens was assessed using the growth modulation index (GMI).

RESULTS

Out of 117 patients, 99 (85%) received at least one line of chemotherapy, 53 (45%) received two lines and 24 (21%) had three or more lines. Median OS was 6.7 months for all 117 patients, 1.8 months for 18 patients who never received chemotherapy, 4.6 months for 46 patients who received one-line chemotherapy and 11.5 months for 53 patients who received at least two lines. Median OS from the beginning of the second-line was 4.7 months. The GMI demonstrated beneficial effects of second-line treatment on disease progression, with a GMI greater than 1.33 in 57% (30/53) of patients.

CONCLUSION

More than half the patients with metastatic PAC progression while receiving one-line chemotherapy achieved better disease control on receiving two lines of treatment.

Second-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: a review of the literature and future directions

Whereas first-line chemotherapy (CT) with single-agent gemcitabine or gemcitabine-based combinations provides a proven benefit in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC), the role of salvage CT after gemcitabine-failure is not well-established and to date no regimen has emerged as preferred in this setting. Several clinical trials have investigated the efficacy and toxicity-profile of second-line CT and indicated that selected patients may obtain significant benefit from it, also with regard to survival. However, definitive results from large randomized phase III studies are still lacking, and the evidence for clinical benefit of salvage CT is based on small phase II trials that evaluated different treatment schedules in heterogeneous populations. The main goal of this paper is reviewing this topic.

Second-line treatment with a combination of continuous 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and mitomycin-C (conti-FAM) in gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic and biliary tract cancer

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy is a commonly used first-line treatment for patients with pancreatic and biliary tract cancer. However, a standard second-line chemotherapy regimen has yet to be developed after gemcitabine treatment. We attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of continuous 5-fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and mitomycin-C (conti-FAM) as a second-line treatment in pancreatic and biliary tract cancer.

METHODS

Patients with advanced pancreatic or biliary tract cancer who were previously treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were enrolled in the study. Chemotherapy was administered as follows: 5-fluorouracil, 800 mg/m2 on days 1 to 5 over 10 hours; mitomycin-C, 8 mg/m2 on day 1; and doxorubicin, 30 mg/m2 on day 1 every 4 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 31 patients received 95 cycles of chemotherapy. Fifteen of the patients had pancreatic cancer. Eleven of the patients had cholangiocarcinoma. Gallbladder cancer was observed in 5 patients. Four (12.9%) patients evidenced partial responses. Eight patients (25.8%) had stable disease. The median time to progression and overall survival time were 2.3 (95% CI: 1.0-3.6) months and 6.7 (95% CI: 4.4-9.0) months, respectively. Major hematologic toxicities included grade 1 to 2 anemia (64.2%), neutropenia (32.6%), thrombocytopenia (20%), and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (10.5%). The most frequently detected nonhematological toxicities were grade 2 and 3 nausea/vomiting (35.5%). One patient was diagnosed with hemolytic uremic syndrome after 8 cycles of treatment.

CONCLUSION

The conti-FAM regimen seems to constitute a safe and feasible salvage therapy in patients with advanced bilio-pancreatic cancer who had been treated previously via gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

The relationship between response to previous systemic treatment and the efficacy of subsequent pemetrexed therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer

BACKGROUND

We sought to identify the relationship between response to previous systemic treatment and the efficacy of subsequent pemetrexed therapy in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Two hundred and fifty clinical stage IIIB or IV NSCLC patients treated with pemetrexed as a second-line or further-line treatment between April 2007 and June 2008 were analyzed retrospectively. Prior therapies were divided into four types (gemcitabine-based [G], paclitaxel-based [P], docetaxel-based [D], and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor [I]). Objective response rates (ORR) and progression-free survivals (PFS) for pemetrexed therapy were analyzed according to the response outcome with each previous treatment.

RESULTS

The ORR of pemetrexed therapy was higher for patients who had achieved partial response with previous [G] therapy than others (15.0% vs. 4.3%, p=0.02). In addition, median PFS for pemetrexed therapy was greater for responders to [G] than for nonresponders (3.0 months vs. 1.7 months, p=0.004). The longer PFS for responders to [G] was also shown in the analysis among patients with squamous cell carcinoma (3.2 months vs. 1.7 months, p=0.056). By univariate analyses, the variables of the responder to [G] therapy, female, adenocarcinoma, never smoking status, and ECOG performance status of 0-1 were good predictive factors for pemetrexed therapy in terms of PFS. Multivariate analysis revealed that only response to [G] had statistical significance (hazard ratio=0.62, p=0.006).

CONCLUSION

Response outcome to prior [G] therapy might predict the efficacy of subsequent pemetrexed therapy in advanced NSCLC.

Pilot study of irinotecan/oxalipltin (IROX) combination chemotherapy for patients with gemcitabine- and 5-fluorouracil- refractory pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine- and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)- based chemotherapy is a commonly used adjuvant or palliative treatment for patients with pancreatic cancer. However, a standard chemotherapy regimen has yet to be developed for patients refractory to gemcitabine and 5-FU treatment. We attempted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a combination of irinotecan and oxaliplatin (IROX) as a salvage treatment for patients with gemcitabine- and 5-FU- refractory pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who were refractory to prior gemcitabine- and 5-FU- based chemotherapy were enrolled in this study. IROX chemotherapy was administered as follows: Irinotecan, 150 mg/m(2) on day 1; and oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m(2) on day 1 over 90 min every 2 weeks.

RESULT

From Mar. 2006 to Dec. 2008, a total of 14 patients were administered 50 cycles of chemotherapy. The male-to-female ratio of the patient group was 11:3. These patients ranged in age from 48 to 73 years (median 65.5 years old). 3 patients (21.4%) evidenced partial responses. four patients (28.6%) exhibited stable disease. The median time to progression and overall survival time were 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2-1.6) months and 4.1 (95% CI: 2.0-6.2) months, respectively. Major hematologic toxicities included grade 1-2 anemia (88%), neutropenia (36%), thrombocytopenia (30%), and grade 3-4 neutropenia (10%). The most frequently detected non-hematological toxicities were grade 3 diarrheas (14%).

CONCLUSION

The IROX regimen appears to constitute a feasible and tolerable salvage therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who have been previously treated with gemcitabine- and 5-FU-based chemotherapy.

Medical management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In 2008, an estimated 34,290 people died from pancreatic cancer and 37,680 new cases were diagnosed. Despite modern treatment, 90% of patients die within 1 year of diagnosis. Pancreatectomy is still the only potentially curative approach, but most patients have incurable disease by the time they are diagnosed, and fewer than 20% are candidates for surgery. In the present paper the English-language literature addressing the medical management in pancreatic cancer was reviewed. Based on these data we will discuss the role of currently used chemotherapy and target therapy in pancreatic cancer, as well as perspectives of the emerging strategies that are arising in order to improve the outcomes of this complex disease.

Oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway is activated in the majority of pancreatic cancers, and inhibition of this pathway has antitumor effects in preclinical studies. We performed a multi-institutional, single-arm, phase II study of RAD001(everolimus), an oral inhibitor of mTOR, in patients who experienced treatment failure on first-line therapy with gemcitabine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients with gemcitabine-refractory, metastatic pancreatic cancer were treated continuously with RAD001 at 10 mg daily. Prior treatment with fluorouracil in the perioperative setting was allowed. Patients were observed for toxicity, treatment response, and survival.

RESULTS

Treatment with single-agent RAD001 was well-tolerated; the most common adverse events were mild hyperglycemia and thrombocytopenia. No patients were removed from the study because of drug-related adverse events. No complete or partial treatment responses were noted, and only seven patients (21%) had stable disease at the first restaging scans performed at 2 months. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.8 months and 4.5 months, respectively. One patient (3%) had a biochemical response, defined as > or = 50% reduction in serum CA19-9.

CONCLUSION

Although well-tolerated, RAD001 administered as a single-agent had minimal clinical activity in patients with gemcitabine-refractory, metastatic pancreatic cancer. Future studies in metastatic pancreatic cancer should assess the combination of mTOR inhibitors with other agents and/or examine inhibitors of other components of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway.

Oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

The PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway is activated in the majority of pancreatic cancers, and inhibition of this pathway has antitumor effects in preclinical studies. We performed a multi-institutional, single-arm, phase II study of RAD001(everolimus), an oral inhibitor of mTOR, in patients who experienced treatment failure on first-line therapy with gemcitabine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients with gemcitabine-refractory, metastatic pancreatic cancer were treated continuously with RAD001 at 10 mg daily. Prior treatment with fluorouracil in the perioperative setting was allowed. Patients were observed for toxicity, treatment response, and survival.

RESULTS

Treatment with single-agent RAD001 was well-tolerated; the most common adverse events were mild hyperglycemia and thrombocytopenia. No patients were removed from the study because of drug-related adverse events. No complete or partial treatment responses were noted, and only seven patients (21%) had stable disease at the first restaging scans performed at 2 months. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 1.8 months and 4.5 months, respectively. One patient (3%) had a biochemical response, defined as > or = 50% reduction in serum CA19-9.

CONCLUSION

Although well-tolerated, RAD001 administered as a single-agent had minimal clinical activity in patients with gemcitabine-refractory, metastatic pancreatic cancer. Future studies in metastatic pancreatic cancer should assess the combination of mTOR inhibitors with other agents and/or examine inhibitors of other components of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway.

Phase 2 trial of oxaliplatin plus capecitabine (XELOX) as second-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

To the authors' knowledge, there is no established second-line chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic cancer who have received gemcitabine-based therapy. A phase 2 trial was conducted to explore the efficacy of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (XELOX) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously who were treated with gemcitabine.

METHODS

Patients aged < or = 65 years who had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (PS) of 0 to 1 received oxaliplatin at a dose of 130 mg/m(2) given on Day 1 and capecitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m(2) twice daily for 14 days. For patients aged >65 years or with an ECOG PS of 2, the oxaliplatin dose was 110 mg/m(2) on Day 1 and the capecitabine dose was 750 mg/m(2) twice daily for 14 days. The treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. Tumor measurements were performed every 9 weeks and the primary study objective was 6-month overall survival.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 41 patients. Of the 39 evaluable patients, 1 patient had a partial response and 10 patients demonstrated stable disease. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the overall median survival was 23 weeks (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 17.0-31.0 weeks). Progression-free survival was 9.9 weeks (95% CI, 9.6-14.5 weeks). The 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 44% (95% CI, 31%-62%) and 21% (95% CI, 11%-38%), respectively. The most common grade 3-4 nonhematologic toxicity was fatigue (toxicity was graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria [version 2.0]).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin is active in gemcitabine-pretreated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, especially in patients with a good PS and those who have responded to first-line chemotherapy.

Gemcitabine in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer

Gemcitabine (2 ,2 -difluorodeoxycytidine) is a deoxycytidine-analog antimetabolite with broad activity against a variety of solid tumors and lymphoid malignancies. It was approved as standard of care in patients with pancreatic cancer one decade ago, based primarily on improvement in clinical benefit response such as pain reduction, improvement in Karnofsky performance status and increase in body weight. This article gives an overview of the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine, highlights the clinical activity of gemcitabine and summarizes the treatment options in metastatic pancreatic cancer with focus on gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. The emerging role of combinations of gemcitabine with novel targeted agents, including small-molecule inhibitors and other investigational drugs, is also discussed.

PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) regimen as second-line therapy in patients with progressive or recurrent pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

The therapeutic arsenal for salvage therapy in pancreatic cancer is limited. PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil [FU], gemcitabine) regimen is an effective upfront treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer. The activity and safety of this combination regimen were assessed by means of an observational study in a population of patients with progressive or recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma after gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with age <76 years, Karnofsky performance status >50 were treated with either classic PEFG (until April 2004: cisplatin and epirubicin 40 mg/m day 1, gemcitabine 600 mg/m day 1 and 8, FU 200 mg/m/d continuous infusion day 1-28) or dose-intense PEFG (since May 2004: cisplatin and epirubicin 30 mg/m, gemcitabine 800 mg/m every 14 days; FU 200 mg/m/d continuous infusion day 1-28) until progressive disease or a maximum of 6 cycles of 28 days.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients (37 metastatic) received 69 cycles of classic PEFG (18 patients) or 104 cycles of dose-intense PEFG (28 patients) as second-line therapy. Prior treatment consisted of single agent gemcitabine (N = 17), gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (N = 4), or PEFG regimen (N = 25). Median previous progression-free survival was 7.6 months. Dose intensity (mg/m/wk) with classic PEFG was cisplatin and epirubicin 8.5; gemcitabine 230; FU 1035 and with dose-intense PEFG was cisplatin and epirubicin 11.5 (+36%); gemcitabine 259 (+13%); FU 1046 (+1%). Main grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 26 patients (56%), thrombocytopenia in 10 (22%), anemia in 11 (24%), fatigue and stomatitis in 4 (9%), vomiting, diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome in 2 (4%). Partial response was observed in 11 patients (24%) (5 classic PEFG 28% + 6 dose-intense PEFG 21%). Median and 1-year survival was 8.3 months (8.0 vs. 9.0 months) and 26% (17% vs. 32%). Median and 6-months progression-free survival was 5.0 months (4.5 vs. 5.0 months) and 34% (33% vs. 38%).

CONCLUSIONS

PEFG regimen in gemcitabine refractory pancreatic cancer had an acceptable toxicity profile and interesting activity, and may constitute a treatment option in this setting.

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

PURPOSE

Gemcitabine monotherapy or gemcitabine-containing combination chemotherapy is the standard first-line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. After disease progression, there is no standard regimen available. In a previous phase II trial, S-1 has been reported to show considerable efficacy, achieving a response rate of 37.5% in chemo-naïve patients with pancreatic cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria were histologically proven pancreatic adenocarcinoma with confirmation of progressive disease while receiving gemcitabine-based first-line chemotherapy, 20-74 years of age, Karnofsky performance status of 80-100 points, with measurable metastatic lesions, adequate hematological, renal and liver functions, and written informed consent. S-1 was administered orally at 40 mg/m(2) twice daily for 28 days with a rest period of 14 days as one course. Administration was repeated until the appearance of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint of this study was an objective response, and secondary endpoints included toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival, as well as clinical benefit response in symptomatic patients.

RESULTS

Forty patients from two institutions were enrolled between September 2004 and November 2005. The most common adverse reactions were fatigue and anorexia, although most of those adverse reactions were tolerable and reversible. One patient developed grade 3 pneumonitis without neutropenia and recovered with appropriate antibiotic treatment. Although no complete response was seen, partial response was obtained in six patients (15, 95% confidence interval, 3.9-26%). Stable disease was noted in 17 patients (43%), and progressive disease in 15 patients (38%). Out of 19 evaluable patients, a clinical benefit response was observed in four patients (21%). The median PFS was 2.0 months, and the median survival time was 4.5 months with a 1-year survival rate of 14.1%.

CONCLUSION

S-1 as monotherapy had marginal anti-tumor activity with tolerable toxicity in patients with gemcitabine refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic cancer: progress in cancer therapy

Pancreatic cancer continues to be a highly lethal disease. In fact the overall 5-year survival rate is less than 4% and has hardly improved over the past two decades. Surgery is the only potential curative treatment, but the majority of patients have an unresectable disease at the diagnosis. After the demonstration in 1997 that gemcitabine could lead to an improvement in clinical benefit and overall survival this chemotherapy agent became the standard of care for advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Several authors tried to improve results obtained with single agent gemcitabine by exploring the activity of novel chemotherapy on biologically targeted agents in combination with gemcitabine. Unfortunately, global findings were often disappointing with only a marginally significant survival benefit. New treatment strategies and a more careful evaluation of innovative therapies are clearly needed for this disease. In this review we will focus on treatment strategies both in resectable and advanced pancreatic cancer.

The role of second-line chemotherapy after gemcitabine failure in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

Systemic chemotherapy with single-agent gemcitabine or a gemcitabine-based regimen still remains a standard of care for the treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. To date, no standard treatment approach for patients that show progressive disease during gemcitabine therapy is defined. Several clinical trials have evaluated the safety and efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after gemcitabine failure in this patient population. Based on the currently available data, there is increasing evidence that selected patients may derive clinical benefit from salvage chemotherapy, also with regard to survival. However, results from large randomized Phase III trials are still lacking and therefore no evidence-based treatment recommendation can be given for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of first-line gemcitabine.

Excess toxicity associated with docetaxel and irinotecan in patients with metastatic, gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer: results of a phase II study

BACKGROUND

No therapeutic standard of care exists for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who progress following first-line treatment with a gemcitabine-based regimen. There is evidence of synergistic activity between docetaxel and irinotecan, and the combination of these two agents has shown promising efficacy in the first-line setting for advanced pancreatic cancer. We, therefore, evaluated this regimen in patients with gemcitabine-refractory disease.

METHODS

Eligible patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were required to have an elevated serum CA19-9 (> 2x ULN) and exposure to one or two prior chemotherapy regimens, including one gemcitabine-based. Treatment consisted of docetaxel 65 mg/m2 and irinotecan 160 mg/m2, both administered every 21 days. Serum CA19-9 levels were measured at the start of each treatment cycle and CT scans performed after every two cycles.

RESULTS

Fourteen patients were enrolled before the study was closed due to excess toxicity. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities included neutropenia/leukopenia, nausea and vomiting, and diarrhea. Fully half of patients received only 1 treatment cycle, with a median time to treatment failure of 36 days. No objective responses were observed, although 3 patients had stable disease for at least 6 cycles. Overall survival for the entire cohort was 134 days, with a 6-month survival rate of 36%.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of docetaxel and irinotecan given on a 21-day cycle is associated with excess toxicity in gemcitabine-refractory patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Although select patients may benefit from treatment, the overall risk:benefit ratio is unfavorable, and other dosing regimens and therapeutic options should be explored in this setting.