Oxaliplatin for pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer: a multicenter phase II study

FOLFOX regimen after failure of fluorouracil and leucovorin plus nanoliposomal-irinotecan therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Fluorouracil, leucovorin (5FU/LV), and nanoliposomal-irinotecan (nal-IRI) combination therapy has been established as the second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Oxaliplatin with 5FU/LV (FOLFOX) is often used as a subsequent treatment, although its efficacy and safety are yet to be fully elucidated. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX as a third- or later-line treatment for patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, retrospective study that enrolled 43 patients who received FOLFOX after failure of gemcitabine-based regimen followed by 5FU/LV + nal-IRI therapy between October 2020 and January 2022. FOLFOX therapy consisted of oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²), levo-leucovorin calcium (200 mg/m²) and 5-FU (2400 mg/m²) every 2 weeks per cycle. Overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response, and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

At the median follow-up time of 3.9 months in all patients, the median overall survival and progression-free survival were 3.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-4.8) and 1.3 months (95% CI, 1.0-1.5), respectively. Response and disease control rates were 0 and 25.6%, respectively. The most common adverse event was anaemia in all grades followed by anorexia; the incidence of anorexia and grades 3 and 4 was 21 and 4.7%, respectively. Notably, grades 3-4 peripheral sensory neuropathy was not observed. Multivariable analysis revealed that a C-reactive protein (CRP) level of > 1.0 mg/dL was a poor prognostic factor for both progression-free survival and overall survival: hazard ratios were 2.037 (95% CI, 1.010-4.107; p = 0.047) and 2.471 (95% CI, 1.063-5.745; p = 0.036), respectively.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOX as a subsequent treatment after failure of second-line treatment with 5FU/LV + nal-IRI is tolerable, although its efficacy is limited, particularly in patients with high CRP levels.

Stage IA Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Cannot Benefit From Chemotherapy: A Propensity Score Matching Study

Purpose: Adjuvant chemotherapy following resection is recommended by clinical practice guidelines for all patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy among the staging groups of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) for PDAC.

Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort analysis was performed by the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) (2004–2015) database and multi-institutional dataset (2010–2018). Baseline clinicopathologic characteristics of PDAC patients, including age, gender, ethnicity, marital status, education level, county income level, county unemployed rate, insurance status, grade, stage, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy, were collected. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed using the Kaplan–Meier method. The SEER and multi-institutional data were adjusted with 1:1 ratio propensity score matching (PSM).

Results: In total, 6,274 and 1,361 PDAC patients were included from the SEER database and multi-institutional dataset, respectively. Regardless of the count of resected lymph nodes, adjuvant chemotherapy prolonged the long-term OS time for stage IB, IIA, IIB, and III patients in both SEER and multi-institutional cohorts. Nevertheless, adjuvant chemotherapy did not provide additional clinical benefits even after a PSM adjustment for stage IA patients in both SEER and multi-institutional cohorts.

Conclusion: Adjuvant chemotherapy improved the long-term survival of stage IB, IIA, IIB, and III PDAC patients; however, it demonstrated no survival benefit in stage IA PDAC patients. Thus, adjuvant chemotherapy should not be recommended for stage IA PDAC patients. These would significantly reduce the economic burden of society and improve the life quality of stage IA PDAC patients.

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.

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.

2,2'- bipyridine coplanar with coordination square of Pd(II) nonyldithiocarbamato antitumor complex interacting with DNA in two distinct steps

Cisplatin is one of the most effective chemotherapy drugs, and has been widely employed for more than four decades in the treatment of different forms of human tumors. In recent years, various examples of metal complex-based compounds have been used for medicinal purposes. In this context, the novel palladium(II) complex, [Pd(non-dtc)(bpy)]NO₃, (non-dtc = nonyldithiocarbamate and bpy = 2,2'- bipyridine) has been synthesized and characterized by means of elemental analysis, conductivity measurements, FT-IR, ¹H NMR, ¹³C NMR, and electronic spectroscopy studies. The 50% cytotoxic concentrations (Ic₅₀) of this Pd(II) complex (0.53 mM) and cisplatin (154 mM) against human cell tumor line (K562) indicates its interaction with DNA of cancer cell at quite low concentration. Thus, binding characteristics of this compound to calf thymus DNA (CT-DNA) has been investigated by UV-vis absorption spectroscopy and fluorescence spectra. The exciting observation of this work in the UV-visible studies was that the Pd(II) complex exhibit two or more types of interaction with CT-DNA. Such properties have rarely been observed in the literature. This complex cooperatively binds with DNA and denatures it too. Fluorescence studies proved the intercalation mode of binding and the other modes seems to be hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions. Binding parameters and thermodynamics of the interaction with CT-DNA are also described. Finally, multifunctional interactions of [Pd(non-dtc)(bpy)]NO₃ make it suitable to interact with DNA of cancer cell at quite low concentration and if it is used as anticancer agent, very low doses will be needed which may have fewer side effects.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan plus fluorouracil and folinic acid: a new treatment option in metastatic pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a deadly disease with half of patients diagnosed in the metastatic setting. Until recently, patients after progression on front-line gemcitabine-based regimen had no standard second-line option, although flouropyrimidine-based regimens were frequently used in this setting. Encapsulation of chemotherapeutics in liposomal formulation is an effective way of prolonging drug deposition thereby enhancing cytotoxic efficacy. In a large phase III randomized trial on metastatic PDAC patients who progressed after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, a novel nanoliposome-encapsulated irinotecan (PEP02, MM-398, nal-IRI, Onivyde, Merrimack, Boston, US) plus fluorouracil and folinic acid demonstrated a significant survival advantage compared to fluorouracil and folinic acid alone. This pivotal study led to the recent FDA approval of nanoliposomal irinotecan in patients with metastatic PDAC. In this article, we will review the literature regarding existing treatment options for metastatic PDAC, focusing specifically on nanoliposomal irinotecan in the clinical setting and its future implication.

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.

Advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a review of current treatment strategies and developing therapies

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is one of the deadliest solid malignancies. A large proportion of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of presentation and, unfortunately, this severely limits the number of patients who can undergo surgical resection, which offers the only chance for cure. Recent therapeutic advances for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer have extended overall survival, but prognosis still remains grim. Given that traditional chemotherapy is ineffective in curing advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, current research is taking a multidirectional approach in the hopes of developing more effective treatments. This article reviews the major clinical trial data that is the basis for the current chemotherapy regimens used as first- and second-line treatments for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We also review the current ongoing clinical trials, which include the use of agents targeting the oncogenic network signaling of K-Ras, agents targeting the extracellular matrix, and immune therapies.

Second-line oxaliplatin, folinic acid, and fluorouracil versus folinic acid and fluorouracil alone for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer: outcomes from the CONKO-003 trial

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of a second-line regimen of oxaliplatin and folinic acid-modulated fluorouracil in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who have experienced progression while receiving gemcitabine monotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A randomized, open-label, phase III study was conducted in 16 institutions throughout Germany. Recruitment ran from January 2004 until May 2007, and the last follow-up concluded in December 2012. Overall, 168 patients age 18 years or older who experienced disease progression during first-line gemcitabine therapy were randomly assigned to folinic acid and fluorouracil (FF) or oxaliplatin and FF (OFF). Patients were stratified according to the presence of metastases, duration of first-line therapy, and Karnofsky performance status.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 54.1 months, and 160 patients were eligible for the primary analysis. The median overall survival in the OFF group (5.9 months; 95% CI, 4.1 to 7.4) versus the FF group (3.3 months; 95% CI, 2.7 to 4.0) was significantly improved (hazard ratio [HR], 0.66; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.91; log-rank P = .010). Time to progression with OFF (2.9 months; 95% CI, 2.4 to 3.2) versus FF (2.0 months; 95% CI, 1.6 to 2.3) was significantly extended also (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50 to 0.94; log-rank P = .019). Rates of adverse events were similar between treatment arms, with the exception of grades 1 to 2 neurotoxicity, which were reported in 29 patients (38.2%) and six patients (7.1%) in the OFF and FF groups, respectively (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Second-line OFF significantly extended the duration of overall survival when compared with FF alone in patients with advanced gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

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.

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.

GABAA receptor-binding protein promotes sensitivity to apoptosis induced by chemotherapeutic agents

In the present study, the expression of human γ-aminobutyrate type A (GABAA) receptor-binding protein (GABARBP) is downregulated in ovarian cancer cell lines and tissues. We also found that the specific function of GABAPBP was that of a novel pro-apoptotic protein. Both GABARBP and cisplatin suppressed cancer cell proliferation in a concentration-dependent manner. The combined treatment of GABARBP and cisplatin was more effective in inhibiting cell growth, as well as cell migration, than with either drug treatment alone. At the same time, the treatment combination is correlated with the downregulation of cyclin D1 and CDK4, arrested cell cycle progression in the G₀-G₁ phase and enhancing p53 expression, while also reducing Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL expression. The p53 and p21 promoter luciferase activities were induced by GABARBP, whereas there was no effect on the p53-/- and p21-/- system. In addition, p53 activity was validated with UV irradiation and siGABARBP. Taken together, our results indicate that GABARBP can regulate the pro-apoptotic activity of cisplatin via the upregulation of p53 expression.

Phase II study of palliative S-1 in combination with cisplatin as second-line chemotherapy for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer patients

In this study, we examined the efficacy and toxicity of S-1 with cisplatin as a second-line palliative chemotherapy for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer patients. Patients who had been previously treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy as palliative first-line chemotherapy received S-1/cisplatin [body surface area (BSA) <1.25 m(2), S-1 40 mg/day; BSA ≤1.25 to <1.5 m(2), 50 mg/day; BSA ≥1.5 m(2) 60 mg/day, orally, bid, daily on days 1-14 followed by a 7-day washout and cisplatin 60 mg/m(2)/day intravenously on day 1] every three weeks. The enrollment of 32 patients was planned, but the study was terminated early, prior to the first stage, following the enrollment of 11 patients. The median age of the patients was 56 (range, 42-74) years. Nine patients had a performance status (PS) of one. In total, there were 21 chemotherapy cycles and the median treatment duration was 21 (range, 7-96) days. Of the 11 patients, five could not be evaluated due to discontinuation prior to the response evaluation. One of the six evaluable patients achieved stable disease (9.1% in intention to treat analysis and 16.7% in per-protocol analysis), while five had progressive disease. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicities were anemia in one, neutropenia in one and thrombocytopenia in one cycle. Grade 3-4 nonhematological toxicities were fatigue in three, nausea in four, anorexia in two, diarrhea in one and peripheral neuropathy in two cycles. With a median follow-up period of 8.9 (range, 3.2-11.3) months, the median time to progression was 44 days [95% confidence interval (CI) 25.4-62.6] and the median overall survival was 81 days (95% CI 9.3-152.7). Combination chemotherapy with S-1 and cisplatin as applied in this study did not result in promising antitumor activity, a high degree of toxicity and poor compliance.

PDCD6 additively cooperates with anti-cancer drugs through activation of NF-κB pathways

The expression of programmed cell death 6 (PDCD6) is known to be down-regulated in cancer cell lines and ovarian cancer tissues compared to normal cells and tissues. In the current study, we characterized the specific function of PDCD6 as a novel pro-apoptotic protein. To define the roles of PDCD6 and cisplatin in tumorigenesis, we either over-expressed PDCD6 or treated it with cisplatin in SKOV-3 ovarian cancer cells. Both PDCD6 and cisplatin respectively inhibited cancer cell proliferation in a dose-dependent manner. The combined treatment of PDCD6 and cisplatin was more effective at suppressing cell growth than with either drug treatment alone, but had no effect with the treatment of caspase-3 and caspase-9 inhibitors. Cleavages of caspase-3, -8, -9, and poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) in PDCD6-overexpressing cells were significantly increased after cisplatin treatment. Cell cycle analysis highly correlated with down-regulation of cyclin D1 and CDK4, and the induction of p16 and p27 as a cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor. Additionally, PDCD6 also suppressed the phosphorylation of signaling regulators downstream of PI3K, including PDK1 and Akt. PDCD6 promotes TNFα-dependent apoptosis through the activation of NF-κB signaling pathways, increasing Bax, p53, and p21 expression, while also down-regulating Bcl-2 and Bcl-xL expression. The p21 and p53 promoter luciferase activities were enhanced by PDCD6, while there was no affect in p53(-/-) and p21(-/-). At the same time, p53 activity was confirmed by UV irradiation and siPDCD6. Taken together, these results provide evidence that PDCD6 can mediate the pro-apoptotic activity of cisplatin or TNFα through the down-regulation of NF-κB expression.

A phase II open-label randomized study to assess the efficacy and safety of selumetinib (AZD6244 [ARRY-142886]) versus capecitabine in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who have failed first-line gemcitabine therapy

Selumetinib is a potent, selective MEK inhibitor with efficacy in several tumor models. This study compared selumetinib with capecitabine in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who had been pretreated with a gemcitabine-based regimen. In this randomized, multicenter phase II study (NCT00372944), patients received either 100 mg oral selumetinib twice daily or 1,250 mg/m(2) oral capecitabine twice daily for 2 weeks followed by a 1-week break, given in 3-weekly cycles. The primary endpoint was overall survival. In all 70 patients were randomized. The median survival was 5.4 months in the selumetinib group and 5.0 months in the capecitabine group (hazard ratio 1.03; two-sided 80% confidence interval = 0.68,1.57; P = 0.92). Disease progression events occurred in 84% and 88% of patients in the selumetinib and capecitabine treatment groups, respectively. Gastrointestinal adverse events (nausea, vomiting and diarrhea) were commonly observed in both treatment groups. Other frequently reported adverse events were acneiform dermatitis and peripheral edema with selumetinib, and palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia with capecitabine. There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival between selumetinib and capecitabine as second-line treatment in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Selumetinib was well tolerated with a manageable safety profile.

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.

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.

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.

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.

A multicenter phase II study of docetaxel in combination with gefitinib in gemcitabine-pretreated patients with advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerance of the docetaxel/gefitinib combination as second-line treatment in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-six patients pretreated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were enrolled in the study. Docetaxel (75 mg/m(2), i.v.) was administered every 3 weeks for a maximum of 6 cycles and gefitinib (250 mg/day, p.o.) was given continuously.

RESULTS

Five (19.2%) patients achieved stable disease. The median duration of disease control was 4.8 months (range 1-13.2), the median time to disease progression 2.1 months (range 1-7.3) and the median survival time 2.9 months (range 1-13.9). Grade 3/4 neutropenia was recorded in 9 (34.6%) patients, although only 1 (3.8%) developed grade 2 febrile neutropenia. One (3.8%) patient experienced grade 3 fatigue and 2 (7.7%) grade 3 diarrhea. Grade 1/2 rash was observed in 13 (50%) patients. There were no treatment-related deaths.

CONCLUSION

The docetaxel/gefitinib combination, although safe, has no activity as salvage treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after failure of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

Prognostic factors in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to identify prognostic factors in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer and to determine criteria for selecting candidates for second-line treatment.

METHODS

The records of 74 patients who were treated with gemcitabine (GEM) and followed up until disease progression were reviewed retrospectively. Sixteen clinical variables at the time of disease progression after GEM chemotherapy were chosen for analysis in this study. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to identify prognostic factors associated with survival.

RESULTS

At the time of analysis, 71 patients had died because of tumor progression. The overall median survival time was 5.1 months after first-line chemotherapy with GEM was initiated. Median survival time after disease progression was 2.0 months. Three factors, performance status, peritoneal dissemination and C-reactive protein level, were identified as independent prognostic factors in multivariate analysis. Median survival time in the good prognosis group (patients with performance status 0 or 1, no peritoneal dissemination and C-reactive protein <5.0 mg/dl) was 3.4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Performance status, serum level of C-reactive protein and peritoneal dissemination were identified as important prognostic factors in patients with GEM-refractory pancreatic cancer. These factors should be considered in determining the treatment following first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

Histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A and proteasome inhibitor PS-341 synergistically induce apoptosis in pancreatic cancer cells

Pancreatic cancer is a common and lethal malignancy. Pancreatic cancer cells overexpress multiple anti-apoptotic factors and death receptor decoys, and are strongly resistant to radiation and to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)- or gemcitabine (Gem)-based chemotherapy regimens. We have found that low-dose proteasome inhibitor PS-341 and histone deacetylase inhibitor trichostatin A (TSA) synergistically induce cytotoxicity in a panel of eight diverse pancreatic cancer cell lines. Combining TSA with PS-341 effectively inactivated NFkappaB signaling, downregulated the predominant endogenous anti-apoptotic factor Bcl-XL overexpression, and disrupted MAP kinase pathway. The combined drug regimen effectively inflicted an average of 71.5% apoptotic cell death (55.2-80%) in diverse pancreatic cancer cell lines by activating the intrinsic apoptotic pathway.

CONCLUSION

The TSA/PS-341 regimen may represent a potential novel therapeutic strategy for pancreatic cancer.

Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in gemcitabine refractory advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase II study

Gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (GEMOX) are active as first-line therapy against advanced pancreatic cancer. This study aims to evaluate the activity and tolerability of this combination in patients refractory to standard gemcitabine (GEM). A total of 33 patients (median age of 57) were included with locally advanced and metastatic evaluable diseases, who had progressed during or following GEM therapy. The GEMOX regimen consisted of 1000 mg m(-2) of GEM at a 100-min infusion on day 1, followed on day 2 by 100 mg m(-2) of oxaliplatin at a 2-h infusion; a cycle that was given every 2 weeks. All patients received at least one cycle of GEMOX (median 5; range 1-29). Response by 31 evaluable patients was as follows: PR: 7/31(22.6%), s.d. > or = 8 weeks: 11/31(35.5%), s.d. < 8 weeks: 1/31(3.2%), PD: 12/31(38.7%). Median duration of response and TTP were 4.5 and 4.2 months, respectively. Median survival was 6 months (range 0.5-21). Clinical benefit response was observed in 17/31 patients (54.8%). Grade III/IV non-neurologic toxicities occurred in 12/33 patients (36.3%), and grade I, II, and III neuropathy in 17(51%), 3(9%), and 4(12%) patients, respectively. GEMOX is a well-tolerated, active regimen that may provide a benefit to patients with advanced pancreatic cancer after progression following standard gemcitabine treatment.