Activity of raltitrexed and gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer

Evaluation of Phase II Trial Design in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated how well phase II trials in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer (LAMPC) meet current recommendations for trial design.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of phase II first-line treatment trial for LAMPC. We assessed baseline characteristics, type of comparison, and primary end point to examine adherence to the National Cancer Institute recommendations for trial design.

RESULTS

We identified 148 studies (180 treatment arms, 7505 participants). Forty-seven (32%) studies adhered to none of the 5 evaluated National Cancer Institute recommendations, 62 (42%) followed 1, 31 (21%) followed 2, and 8 (5%) followed 3 recommendations. Studies varied with respect to the proportion of patients with good performance status (range, 0%-80%) and locally advanced disease (range, 14%-100%). Eighty-two (55%) studies concluded that investigational agents should progress to phase III testing; of these, 24 (16%) had documented phase III trials. Three (8%) phase III trials demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements for investigational agents. One of 38 phase II trials that investigated biological investigational agents was enriched for a biomarker.

CONCLUSIONS

Phase II trials do not conform well to current recommendations for trial design in LAMPC.

Medical treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic carcinoma is a devastating disease with the worst prognosis of all solid tumors; the only cure is surgery. The vast majority of patients are inoperable at the time of diagnosis and require palliative treatment. With a median survival time oscillating around 6 months, indicating an almost complete resistance to conventional cytotoxic and radiation therapy, there is ample room for improvement. Therefore, pancreatic carcinoma has been used to trial many new substances and novel concepts. All aspects of palliative antitumor treatment will be presented in detail and discussed. Finally, some outlooks are given into the future of pancreatic cancer treatment.

Chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

Single-agent gemcitabine was established as standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after a superior clinical benefit response was demonstrated in a randomized study comparing it to 5-fluorouracil (FU). Until recently, many subsequent randomized trials of newer, often gemcitabine-based combinations have not been able to show improved survival over gemcitabine. Combination gemcitabine and capecitabine is likely to become the preferred standard treatment, at least in the UK, on the basis of the positive interim results of the UK National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) randomized study of chemotherapy with this combination. At present, there is no standard second-line treatment for patients who have become refractory to gemcitabine, although a recently reported study has suggested that oxaliplatin with FU and leucovorin is superior to best supportive care in these patients. This article will review and discuss the clinical trials of chemotherapy for this disease, including the more recent trials, which have included the novel targeted agents.

A Phase II Trial of Raltitrexed (Tomudex®) in Advanced Pancreatic and Biliary Carcinoma

PURPOSE

To evaluate the impact of raltitrexed (Tomudex) on the quality of life in a multicenter, phase II study in advanced pancreatic and biliary carcinomas.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-six patients with advanced, histologically proven pancreatic (n = 37, 80.4%) or biliary (n = 9, 19.6%) carcinoma received 3 mg/m2 raltitrexed intravenously once every 3 weeks. For the quality of life assessments, EORTC QLQ-C30 was used, and the evaluation of the clinical benefit was performed according to the 4 criteria of the clinical benefit response. All patients were assessed for safety, and 41 patients were evaluable for objective response.

RESULTS

Patients (63% male/37% female) had a mean age of 61.2 years, 71.7% had a PS of 0-1, 78.3% had metastatic disease, and 63% had at least 2 tumoral sites. A total of 176 cycles were administered with a mean of 4 cycles per patient (range 1-12). Three out of 43 patients evaluable for EORTC QLQ-C30 (7.0%; CI(95%) 1.4-19.0%) had a quality of life improvement. Thirty-two patients fulfilled the 4 criteria required to evaluate the clinical benefit response; 5 were responders (15.6%; CI(95%) 5.3-32.8%); 1 patient was a good responder based on both the EORTC questionnaire and the clinical benefit response. Forty-one patients were assessable for response, 3 responded to treatment (response rate: 6.5 %; CI(95%) 1.3-17.9%). Median survival was 4.6 months (CI(95%) 2.9-8.2 months), the 1-year survival rate was 21.8%. The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (8%), leukopenia (8%), thrombopenia (6%), anemia (6%), liver enzyme elevations (11%), asthenia (9%), vomiting (9%), abdominal pain (7%), and phlebitis (6%). One treatment-related death occurred (neutropenic sepsis).

CONCLUSION

Raltitrexed appeared to be generally well tolerated and showed a clinical benefit response and/or quality of life improvement in a limited number of patients.

Emerging drugs in pancreatic cancer

Improving survival in patients with pancreatic cancer remains a formidable challenge. For the few patients with localised stages of the disease, intra-operative radiotherapy, adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neo-adjuvant therapies remain non-validated and the survival benefit conferred by 5-fluorouracil-folinic acid adjuvant chemotherapy over radical surgery alone is still a matter of debate. Gemcitabine has recently emerged as the standard single agent in advanced stages of the disease and pharmacokinetic refinements such as the use of a fixed-dose infusion rate may further improve still rather modest result figures. At present, most efforts deal with the development of more effective doublet or triplet therapies, combining gemcitabine with either conventional cytotoxic drugs--the most promising being oxaliplatin--or more innovative, targeted therapeutic agents. Among these agents, matrix metalloprotease inhibitors and farnesyltransferase inhibitors have already undergone Phase III trials, alone or in combination with gemcitabine, with rather disappointing results. However, preclinical and Phase I and II studies of cyclooxygenase-2 or lipoxygenase inhibitors, various immunotherapeutic approaches and several tyrosine kinase inhibitors or monoclonal antibodies against growth factors or their receptors are encouraging and may provide some hope for patients with pancreatic cancer.

A phase II study of raltitrexed and gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma

Advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas has a very poor prognosis. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and tolerability of a combination of the chemotherapeutic agents gemcitabine and raltitrexed. Chemonaïve patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were treated with a combination of raltitrexed (3.5 mg m⁻² on day 1 of a 21-day treatment cycle) and gemcitabine (800 mg m⁻² intravenously (i.v.) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle). Between April 2000 and February 2003, 27 patients were enrolled onto the study. The mean duration of treatment was 11 weeks. Four of 27 patients experienced at least one episode of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia. One patient with grade 4 neutropenia died due to sepsis. Four of 27 patients experienced grade 4 diarrhoea. There was one partial remission (4%) and 12 patients experienced disease stabilisation (44%). The 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 37 and 11%, respectively. Symptomatic benefit occurred in seven (26%) patients. We conclude that a combination of raltitrexed and gemcitabine, using the schedule and doses in this study, cannot be recommended for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

Raltitrexed plus Gemcitabine (TOMGEM) in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

This multicenter phase II study was designed to determine the activity and tolerance of gemcitabine and raltitrexed in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three chemonaive patients with measurable disease received the TOMGEM regimen consisting of Raltitrexed 3 mg/m(2) in 15 min followed by Gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) in 30 min on day 1, Gemcitabine alone 1,000 mg/m(2) on day 8 and repeated on day 21.

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients (median age: 62; locally advanced/metastatic disease: 5/28) were enrolled; the total number of cycles administered was 173 (median: 4). There were 10 partial response (confirmed), 2 stable disease (SD) >/=24 weeks, 7 SD <24 weeks, and 14 progressive disease for a response rate of 30.3% (95% CI: 14-46%); a clinical benefit was observed in 8/30 patients assessed (30%); median duration of response was 9.1 months. National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade III or IV neutropenia/thrombocytopenia were observed in 42 and 12% of the patients, respectively. Relevant nonhematological toxicities (grade III-IV) were rare although one toxic death was observed. Median time to progression was 2.8 months; one-year survival was 21%; median survival was 4.7 months.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that the combination of raltitrexed/gemcitabine is a very convenient regimen with an acceptable toxicity, and is active in advanced pancreatic cancer.

Old and new drugs in systemic therapy of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pancreatic cancer nearly equals its death rate (97%). Two-year survival is about 10%. Chemotherapy treatment is problematic because of the palliative and limited duration of response.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article analyzes the objective response and median survival time (MST) for old and new drugs in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

The most encouraging results to date come from studies of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) as an adjuvant therapy and of gemcitabine in the advanced disease, which is one of the most active and best tolerated drugs in recent years. However, with the introduction of new drugs or with different old drug associations, interesting results are also becoming evident.

CONCLUSIONS

New approaches to CT treatment are necessary. Patient enrollment into rigorous and well conducted clinical trials, either at tumor diagnosis or after tumor recurrence, will generate new information regarding investigational therapies and it will offer improved therapies for patients with this disease.