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

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.

Modified irinotecan and infusional 5-fluorouracil (mFOLFIRI) in patients with refractory advanced pancreas cancer (APC): a single-institution experience

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the fourth leading cause of cancer death. Recently, MM-398 (nanoliposomal irinotecan) was shown to be associated with significant improvement in outcome measures with acceptable toxicities when combined with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) compared to 5-FU/LV alone in patients failing one line of gemcitabine-based therapy. There is a paucity of data evaluating the role of irinotecan in combination with 5FU in advanced pancreas cancer (APC). We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who received mFOLFIRI (minus bolus 5FU and LV). All patients with metastatic disease who had failed at least one line of gemcitabine-based therapy prior to receiving mFOLFIRI were included in this study. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the continuous variables and adverse events (AEs), and Kaplan-Meier methods were used to calculate the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Forty patients were included in this analysis. Patients received 1-5 lines of prior therapy (25 % with more than 3 lines of prior therapy). The mean age at diagnosis was 60, and 98 % had ECOG of 1. The mean CA 19-9 at the start of therapy was 33,169 U/ml. The median PFS was 2.59 months [95 % confidence interval (CI) (1.90, 3.54)], and OS was 4.75 months [95 % CI (3.14, 8.98)]. The most common AEs included fatigue (98 %), neuropathy (83 %), anorexia (68 %), nausea (60 %) and constipation (55 %). Grade 3 toxicities included fatigue (13 %) and rash (3 %). There were no observed grade 4 toxicities. In this single-institution retrospective analysis, mFOLFIRI was found to be both tolerable and relatively effective in a heavily pretreated patient population with APC. Future prospective studies should consider evaluating the role of mFOLFIRI in refractory APC.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid in metastatic pancreatic cancer after previous gemcitabine-based therapy (NAPOLI-1): a global, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Nanoliposomal irinotecan showed activity in a phase 2 study in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapies. We assessed the effect of nanoliposomal irinotecan alone or combined with fluorouracil and folinic acid in a phase 3 trial in this population.

METHODS

We did a global, phase 3, randomised, open-label trial at 76 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy were randomly assigned (1:1) using an interactive web response system at a central location to receive either nanoliposomal irinotecan monotherapy (120 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks, equivalent to 100 mg/m(2) of irinotecan base) or fluorouracil and folinic acid. A third arm consisting of nanoliposomal irinotecan (80 mg/m(2), equivalent to 70 mg/m(2) of irinotecan base) with fluorouracil and folinic acid every 2 weeks was added later (1:1:1), in a protocol amendment. Randomisation was stratified by baseline albumin, Karnofsky performance status, and ethnic origin. Treatment was continued until disease progression or intolerable toxic effects. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The primary analysis was planned after 305 events. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received study drug. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01494506.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 11, 2012, and Sept 11, 2013, 417 patients were randomly assigned either nanoliposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil and folinic acid (n=117), nanoliposomal irinotecan monotherapy (n=151), or fluorouracil and folinic acid (n=149). After 313 events, median overall survival in patients assigned nanoliposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil and folinic acid was 6.1 months (95% CI 4.8-8.9) vs 4.2 months (3.3-5.3) with fluorouracil and folinic acid (hazard ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.49-0.92; p=0.012). Median overall survival did not differ between patients assigned nanoliposomal irinotecan monotherapy and those allocated fluorouracil and folinic acid (4.9 months [4.2-5.6] vs 4.2 months [3.6-4.9]; 0.99, 0.77-1.28; p=0.94). The grade 3 or 4 adverse events that occurred most frequently in the 117 patients assigned nanoliposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil and folinic acid were neutropenia (32 [27%]), diarrhoea (15 [13%]), vomiting (13 [11%]), and fatigue (16 [14%]).

INTERPRETATION

Nanoliposomal irinotecan in combination with fluorouracil and folinic acid extends survival with a manageable safety profile in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who previously received gemcitabine-based therapy. This agent represents a new treatment option for this population.

FUNDING

Merrimack Pharmaceuticals.

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.

Taxanes: impact on pancreatic cancer

Taxanes are core therapeutic components for several advanced malignancies, and have been studied extensively in pancreatic adenocarcinomas with mixed results. Although the triplet combination FOLFIRINOX improves outcomes for patients with metastatic disease, it is compounded by significant toxicity, and novel regimens, rationally designed and based on thorough mechanistic activity on the tumor targets, are clearly needed. Solvent-based taxanes, docetaxel and paclitaxel, have little activity as single agents, but combinations with fluoropyrimidines and gemcitabine show efficacy, albeit they have not undergone testing in phase III trials. Pancreatic cancer is characterized by an abundant desmoplastic, fibroinflammatory and hypoperfused stroma, which has been blamed for its overall chemoresistance. Nanoparticle bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) has been pharmacologically designed as a novel water-soluble agent, with improved therapeutic index compared with the cremophor-based formulation, capable of achieving higher systemic exposure. In preclinical systems, when combined with gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel increased intratumoral gemcitabine delivery, possibly due to inducing stromal 'collapse' and through inhibition of the gemcitabine-catabolizing enzyme cytidine deaminase. Most recently, the combination of nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine demonstrated significant survival benefit with good tolerability in metastatic pancreatic cancer in the phase III trial MPACT, and now represents one of the gold-standard regimens for this disease. Although taxanes are overall potent chemotherapeutics for various cancers, it is clear that for meaningful results in pancreatic adenocarcinomas, rationally designed combinations and novel technologies for drug delivery are likely to be most successful.

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.

A multinational phase 2 study of nanoliposomal irinotecan sucrosofate (PEP02, MM-398) for patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

PEP02, also known as MM-398, is a novel nanoliposomal irinotecan that has improved pharmacokinetics and tumour bio-distribution of the free drug. This phase 2 study evaluated PEP02 monotherapy as second-line treatment for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients who had metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, Karnofsky performance status ≥70, and had progressed following gemcitabine-based therapy were eligible. Intravenous injection of PEP02 120 mg m(-2) was given every 3 weeks. Simon 2-stage design was used. The primary objective was 3-month survival rate (OS(3-month)).

RESULTS

A total of 40 patients were enrolled. The most common severe adverse events included neutropenia, abdominal pain, asthenia, and diarrhoea. Three patients (7.5%) achieved an objective response, with an additional 17 (42.5%) demonstrating stable disease for a minimum of two cycles. Ten (31.3%) of 32 patients with an elevated baseline CA19-9 had a >50% biomarker decline. The study met its primary end point with an OS(3-month) of 75%, with median progression-free survival and overall survival of 2.4 and 5.2 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

PEP02 demonstrates moderate antitumour activity with a manageable side effect profile for metastatic, gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer patients. Given the limited treatment options available to this patient population, a phase 3 trial of PEP02 (MM-398), referred to as NAPOLI-1, is currently underway.

Gemcitabine and cisplatin combined with regional hyperthermia as second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

There is no standard second-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) after gemcitabine (G) failure. Cisplatin (Cis)-based chemotherapy has shown activity in APC. It is proven that cytotoxicity of G and Cis is enhanced by heat exposure at 40° to 42°C. Therefore G plus Cis with regional hyperthermia (RHT) might be beneficial for patients with G-refractory APC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analysed 23 patients with advanced (n = 2) or metastatic (n = 21) pancreatic cancer with relapse after G mono first-line chemotherapy (n = 23). Patients had received G (day 1, 1000 mg/m(2)) and Cis (day 2 and 4, 25 mg/m(2)) in combination with RHT (day 2 and 4, 1 h) biweekly for 4 months. We analysed feasibility, toxicity, time to second progression (TTP2), overall survival (OS) and clinical response.

RESULTS

Between October 1999 and August 2008 23 patients were treated. Haematological toxicity was low with no grade 4 event. Hyperthermia-associated toxicity consisted of discomfort because of bolus pressure (3%), power-related pain (7%) or position-related pain (17%). Median TTP1 was 5.9 months (95% confidence interval (CI): 2.6-9.2), median TTP2 was 4.3 months (95%CI: 1.2-7.4) and OS 12.9 months (95%CI: 9.9-15.9). The disease control rate in 16 patients with available CT scans was 50%.

CONCLUSION

We show first clinical data of G plus Cis with RHT being clinically active in G-pretreated APC with low toxicity. A prospective controlled phase II second-line clinical trial (EudraCT: 2005-003855-11) and a randomised phase III adjuvant clinical trial offering this treatment (HEAT; EudraCT: 2008-004802-14) are currently open for recruitment.

FOLFIRI regimen in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma resistant to gemcitabine and platinum-salts

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the FOLFIRI regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) after the failure of gemcitabine and platinum salts.

METHODS: All consecutive patients with histologically confirmed, metastatic PAC and World Health Organization performance status (PS) ≤ 2 received FOLFIRI-1 [irinotecan 180 mg/m² on day 1 and leucovorin 400 mg/m² followed by 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m² bolus, then 5-FU 2400 mg/m² as a 46-h infusion, biweekly] or FOLFIRI-3 (irinotecan 100 mg/m² on day 1 and leucovorin 400 mg/m², then 5-FU 2400 mg/m² as a 46-h infusion and irinotecan 100 mg/m² repeated on day 3, biweekly) after failure of gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapies as a systematic policy in two institutions between January 2005 and May 2010. Tumor response, time to progression (TTP), overall survival rate (OS) and grade 3-4 toxicities were retrospectively studied. Subgroup analyses were performed to search for prognostic factors.

RESULTS: Sixty-three patients (52.4% male, median age 59 years) were analyzed. Among them, 42.9% were PS 0, 38.1% were PS 1 and 19.0% were PS 2. Fifty one patients (81.0%) had liver metastases. Before the FOLFIRI regimen, patients had received 1 line (n = 19), 2 lines (n = 39) or 3 lines (n = 5) of chemotherapy. Median TTP obtained with the line before FOLFIRI was 3.9 mo (95% CI: 3.4-5.3 mo). A total of 480 cycles was completed (median: 6 cycles, range: 1-51 cycles). The main reason for discontinuing FOLFIRI was tumor progression (90.3%). Tumor control was achieved in 25 patients (39.7%) (partial response: n = 5, stable disease: n = 20) with FOLFIRI. Median TTP was 3.0 mo (95% CI: 2.1-3.9 mo) and median OS was 6.6 mo (95% CI: 5.3-8.1 mo). Dose adaptation was required in 36 patients (57.1%). Fifteen patients (23.8%) had grade 3-4 toxicities, mainly hematological (n = 11) or digestive (n = 4). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 3 patients. There was no toxic death. PS 2 was significantly associated with poor TTP [hazard ratio (HR): 16.036, P < 0.0001] and OS (HR: 4.003, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION: The FOLFIRI regimen had an acceptable toxicity and an interesting efficacy in our study, limited to patients in good condition (PS 0-1).

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.

The use of GTX as second-line and later chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a retrospective analysis

PURPOSE

There are limited data regarding the role of second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) after the failure of initial chemotherapy. No data exist on the use of GTX after the failure of first-line therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We identified patients who were given GTX chemotherapy for a diagnosis of mPC after the failure of initial therapy. Demographic features, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), response to treatment, and toxicities were recorded.

RESULTS

The 59 evaluable patients received a median of 2 prior therapies. Three had no prior gemcitabine. Median PS was 1. Median survival was 22 weeks; progression-free survival was 9.9 weeks. Survival did not correlate with the number of prior regimens but trended with PS. There were no radiologic responses; those with stable disease (n = 21) had a better survival than those with progression (n = 29) or unevaluable patients (n = 9). Median survival was 38.3, 15.0, and 7.4 weeks, respectively. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities included leucopenia (n = 14), anemia (n = 7), and thrombocytopenia (n = 6). Hospitalizations were required in 21 patients, for febrile neutropenia (n = 7), non-neutropenic infection (n = 3), pulmonary embolus (n = 2), anemia or failure to thrive (n = 9). A 75% drop or more in CA 19-9 correlated with improved survival.

CONCLUSIONS

GTX is an active regimen in patients previously treated with gemcitabine for mPC. Better performance status and >75% drop in pretreatment CA 19-9 were associated with longer survival. The number of prior regimens did not predict for survival duration.

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.

[Second line chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer]

Pancreatic cancer is a very lethal cancer. It is the 5th most common cause for cancer related mortality in Korea. Most of patients have unresectable pancreatic cancer, and systemic chemotherapy remains the only treatment option for them. Gemcitabine has been adopted as the standard first-line agent for advanced pancreatic cancer, but the progression free survival with gemcitabine is short. Many of patients need further treatment. We reviewed the clinical trials of second line chemotherapy for gemcitabine refractory pancreatic cancer and tried to show currently available treatment options.

Palliative chemotherapy for pancreatic malignancies

Metastatic pancreatic cancer is often one of the most challenging malignancies a medical oncologist faces. Although the primary endpoint of many studies remains overall survival, palliation and quality of life are now more commonly being addressed. The author discusses the most common chemotherapeutic modalities for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer, such as single agent chemotherapy, combination therapy, targeted therapy, and second line treatment.

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.

A phase II study of bevacizumab plus erlotinib for gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

No standard of care exists for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer following progression on first-line chemotherapy. Based on potential for additive or synergistic activity by concurrent inhibition of VEGF and EGFR, we conducted a phase II study evaluating the combination of bevacizumab plus erlotinib in this patient population.

METHODS

Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, ECOG performance status 0-1, and previous exposure to 1-3 systemic therapies (at least one gemcitabine-based) were eligible. Treatment consisted of bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 21 days plus erlotinib 150 mg daily.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were enrolled, including eight who had previously received VEGF-targeted therapy and nine prior erlotinib. Median number of treatment cycles was 2 (range, 1-7). Common toxicities included rash (72%), diarrhea (25%), venous thromboembolic events (15%), and hypertension (11%). One patient demonstrated partial response and seven others stable disease for >2 cycles. CA19-9 decline ≥25% was observed in 4/26 patients with baseline levels >2x ULN. Estimated median time to progression was 40 days (95% CI, 35-41 days) and median survival 102 days (95% CI, 74-117 days), with a 6-month survival rate of 22%. Baseline concentration of circulating endothelial cells (CD45(-)/CD34(+)/CD31(+)) was inversely associated with overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of bevacizumab and erlotinib is safe but relatively ineffective in patients with gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer. Future studies should focus on refining subsets of patients in this challenging population likely to benefit from treatment beyond first-line.