Randomized phase II study evaluating oxaliplatin alone, oxaliplatin combined with infusional 5-FU, and infusional 5-FU alone in advanced pancreatic carcinoma patients

Folfirinox vs. Gemcitabine + Nab-Paclitaxel as the First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The efficacy and safety of Folfirinox (FFX) or gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (GnP) to be used as the first-line drugs for pancreatic cancer (PC) is yet to be established. We conducted an analysis of retrospective studies to assess the efficacy and safety of these two regimens by comparing their survival and safety outcomes in patients with PC.

Methods

We conducted an extensive review of two electronic databases from inception till February 2023 to include all the relevant studies that compared FFX with GnP published and unpublished work. Retrospective studies were only included. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were pooled using hazard ratios (HRs), while objective response rate (ORR) and safety outcomes were pooled using odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence interval (CI) using the random effects model.

Results

A total of 7,030 patients were identified in a total of 21 articles that were shortlisted. Pooled results concluded that neither FFX nor GnP was associated to increase the OS time (HR: 0.93, 95% CI: 0.83 - 1.04; P = 0.0001); however, FFX was more likely associated with increased PFS when compared to GnP (HR: 0.88, 95% CI: 0.81 - 0.97; P < 0.0001). ORR proved to be non-significant between the two regimens (OR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.64 - 1.27; P = 0.15). Safety outcomes included neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia and diarrhea. GnP was more associated with diarrhea (OR: 1.96, 95% CI: 1.22 - 3.15; P = 0.001), while FFX was seen to cause anemia (OR: 0.70, 95% CI: 0.51 - 0.98; P = 0.10) in PC patients. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were in-significant in the two drug regimens (OR: 1.10, 95% CI: 0.92 - 1.31; P = 0.33 and OR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.60 - 1.13; P = 0.23, respectively).

Conclusion

FFX and GnP showed a significant difference in increasing the PFS, while no difference was observed while measuring OS. Safety outcomes showed that FFX and GnP shared similar safety profiles as FFX was associated with hematological outcomes, while GnP was more associated with non-hematological outcomes.

Optimizing First-Line Chemotherapy in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Efficacy of FOLFIRINOX versus Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most lethal tumors in Europe with an overall 5-year survival rate of 5%. Since 1992, gemcitabine (Gem) has been the treatment of choice for metastatic disease with significant improvement in median overall survival (OS) compared to fluorouracil. A good performance status (PS) at diagnosis appears to be a strong predictive factor for better survival. Overall, 50% of PC are metastatic or locally advanced at diagnosis, and more than 70% of the resected patients will experience a recurrence, with a median OS ranging from 4 to 10 months (mos). FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) and Nab-paclitaxel (Nab-p) plus Gem have recently increased survival of patients with metastatic PC, over Gem. Treatment with FOLFIRINOX is generally considered more effective with respect to the doublet, with toxicity concerns, FOLFIRINOX achieves an overall response rate (ORR) of 31.6%, while for Nab-p plus Gem ORR is 23%; however, FOLFIRINOX was associated with higher rates of grade 3 and higher adverse events. Although the international guidelines indicate that both regimens can be used as first-line therapy for patients with metastatic PC, FOLFIRINOX is the most widely used; Nab-p plus Gem is more frequently used in patients with lower PS. In this review, we critically analyze these two regimens to give a pragmatic guide to treatment options.

Treatment of unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer with percutaneous irreversible electroporation (IRE) following initial systemic chemotherapy (LAP-PIE) trial: study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Approximately 30% of patients with pancreas cancer have unresectable locally advanced disease, which is currently treated with systemic chemotherapy. A new treatment option of irreversible electroporation (IRE) has been investigated for these patients since 2005. Cohort studies suggest that IRE confers a survival advantage, but with associated, procedure-related complications. Selection bias may account for improved survival and there have been no prospective randomised trials evaluating the harms and benefits of therapy. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the feasibility of a randomised comparison of IRE therapy with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Eligible patients with LAPC who have undergone first-line 5-FluoroUracil, Leucovorin, Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin chemotherapy will be randomised to receive either a single session of IRE followed by (if indicated) further chemotherapy or to chemotherapy alone (standard of care). Fifty patients from up to seven specialist pancreas centres in the UK will be recruited over a period of 15 months. Trial follow-up will be 12 months. The primary outcome measure is ability to recruit. Secondary objectives include practicality and technical success of treatment, acceptability of treatment to patients and clinicians and safety of treatment. A qualitative study has been incorporated to evaluate the patient and clinician perspective of the locally advanced pancreatic cancer with percutaneous irreversible electroporation trial. It is likely that the data obtained will guide the structure, the primary outcome measure, the power and the duration of a subsequent multicentre randomised controlled trial aimed at establishing the clinical efficiency of pancreas IRE therapy. Indicative procedure-related costings will be collected in this feasibility trial, which will inform the cost evaluation in the subsequent study on efficiency.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The protocol has received approval by London-Brent Research Ethics Committee reference number 21/LO/0077.Results will be analysed following completion of trial recruitment and follow-up. Results will be presented to international conferences with an interest in oncology, hepatopancreaticobiliary surgery and interventional radiology and be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN14986389.

Application of Approved Cisplatin Derivatives in Combination Therapy against Different Cancer Diseases

The problems with anticancer therapy are resistance and toxicity. From 3000 Cisplatin derivatives tested as antitumor agents, most of them have been rejected, due to toxicity. The aim of current study is the comparison of therapeutic combinations of the currently applied in clinical practice: Cisplatin, Carboplatin, Oxaliplatin, Nedaplatin, Lobaplatin, Heptaplatin, and Satraplatin. The literature data show that the strategies for the development of platinum anticancer agents and bypassing of resistance to Cisplatin derivatives and their toxicity are: combination therapy, Pt IV prodrugs, the targeted nanocarriers. The very important strategy for the improvement of the antitumor effect against different cancers is synergistic combination of Cisplatin derivatives with: (1) anticancer agents—Fluorouracil, Gemcitabine, Cytarabine, Fludarabine, Pemetrexed, Ifosfamide, Irinotecan, Topotecan, Etoposide, Amrubicin, Doxorubicin, Epirubicin, Vinorelbine, Docetaxel, Paclitaxel, Nab-Paclitaxel; (2) modulators of resistant mechanisms; (3) signaling protein inhibitors—Erlotinib; Bortezomib; Everolimus; (4) and immunotherapeutic drugs—Atezolizumab, Avelumab, Bevacizumab, Cemiplimab, Cetuximab, Durvalumab, Erlotinib, Imatinib, Necitumumab, Nimotuzumab, Nivolumab, Onartuzumab, Panitumumab, Pembrolizumab, Rilotumumab, Trastuzumab, Tremelimumab, and Sintilimab. An important approach for overcoming the drug resistance and reduction of toxicity of Cisplatin derivatives is the application of nanocarriers (polymers and liposomes), which provide improved targeted delivery, increased intracellular penetration, selective accumulation in tumor tissue, and enhanced therapeutic efficacy. The advantages of combination therapy are maximum removal of tumor cells in different phases; prevention of resistance; inhibition of the adaptation of tumor cells and their mutations; and reduction of toxicity.

Meta-analysis and indirect treatment comparison of modified FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel as first-line chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Modified FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NAB) have been recommended as first-line therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC). Due to the lack of evidence to directly compare them, we conducted this network meta-analysis to indirectly compare the effectiveness and toxicity of modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB.

METHODS

The eligible retrospective studies on treatments related to modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB up to 4 April 2020 were searched and assessed. We used the frequentist model to analyze the survival and toxicity data between different treatments. Pooled analysis for overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR) and events of toxicity were analyzed in this study.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies were involved in this network meta-analysis. The comparisons on OS and PFS showed that modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB had similar treatment efficacy (OS: 1.13; 95% CI: 0.78-1.63; PFS: HR: 1.19; 95% CI: 0.85-1.67). GEM-NAB was more effective than modified FOLFIRINOX based on the result of ORR (RR: 1.43; 95% CI: 1.04-1.96). Moreover, our analysis showed a similar toxicity profile between modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB.

CONCLUSIONS

The current evidence showed that modified FOLFIRINOX and GEM-NAB were similar in survival and toxicity. Many factors should be considered for in the formulation of optimal treatment, and our meta-analysis could provide some guidance to treatment selection in the first-line setting for advanced PC.

The role of FOLFIRINOX in metastatic pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis

Background

The prognosis of pancreatic cancer (PC) is extremely poor, and most patients with metastatic PC still receive palliative care. Here, we report the efficacy and safety of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil) in the treatment of metastatic PC.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, and Cochrane library databases for articles that described efficacy and safety of FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic PC, from January 1996 to July 2020. The primary outcomes targeted included overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS).

Results

We found that FOLFIRINOX could directly improve OS rate of patients with metastatic PC (HR 0.76, 95% Cl 0.67–0.86, p<0.001) but had no benefit on PFS. Results from subgroup analyses showed that FOLFIRINOX had superior benefits than monochemotherapy (HR 0.59, 95% Cl 0.52–0.67, p<0.001), followed by FOLFIRINOX versus combination chemotherapy (HR 0.76, 95% Cl 0.61–0.95, p<0.001). The result of FOLFIRINOX versus nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine had no benefit (HR 0.91, 95% Cl 0.82–1.02, p>0.05). The main adverse events (AEs) targeted hematological toxicity and the gastrointestinal system, and included febrile neutropenia, a reduction in white blood cells and appetite, as well as diarrhea.

Conclusion

These findings indicated that FOLFIRINOX has potential benefits for the prognosis of patients with metastatic PC. Furthermore, there is no difference between the regimen of FOLFIRINOX and nab-paclitaxel + gemcitabine in this study. The application of FOLFIRINOX should be according to the actual situation of the patients and the experience of the doctors.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12957-021-02291-6.

Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Current Clinical Outcomes, Mechanism of Action and Opportunities for Synergistic Therapy

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) accounts for 30% of patients with pancreatic cancer. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel cancer treatment that may improve survival and quality of life in LAPC. This narrative review will provide a perspective on the clinical experience of pancreas IRE therapy, explore the evidence for the mode of action, assess treatment complications, and propose strategies for augmenting IRE response. A systematic search was performed using PubMed regarding the clinical use and safety profile of IRE on pancreatic cancer, post-IRE sequential histological changes, associated immune response, and synergistic therapies. Animal data demonstrate that IRE induces both apoptosis and necrosis followed by fibrosis. Major complications may result from IRE; procedure related mortality is up to 2%, with an average morbidity as high as 36%. Nevertheless, prospective and retrospective studies suggest that IRE treatment may increase median overall survival of LAPC to as much as 30 months and provide preliminary data justifying the well-designed trials currently underway, comparing IRE to the standard of care treatment. The mechanism of action of IRE remains unknown, and there is a lack of data on treatment variables and efficiency in humans. There is emerging data suggesting that IRE can be augmented with synergistic therapies such as immunotherapy.

The present and future of systemic and microenvironment-targeted therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains one of the deadliest cancer diagnoses with 5-year survival rates as low as 3%. For decades, gemcitabine remained the mainstay of systemic therapy before the approvals of FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel. Despite these advances in the early 2010s, almost all patients progress on systemic chemotherapy and significant effort is needed to identify novel therapeutic targets. A promising array of approaches is currently under investigation, enabled by deeper understanding of the immune system within the tumor microenvironment (TME) and of the key vulnerabilities in pathways essential for tumor survival. In this review, we will explore the different approaches to boost tumor immunity and to target tumor metabolic pathways that are currently under clinical investigation for systemic treatment, and highlight the promising therapeutic areas that may give rise to the next generation of therapies for pancreatic cancer.

FOLFOXIRI vs FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: A population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRINOX regimen is the first-line reference chemotherapy (L1) in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC). FOLFOXIRI, a schedule with a lower dose of irinotecan and no bolus 5-fluorouracil, has demonstrated efficacy and feasibility in colorectal cancer.

AIM

To investigate the potential clinical value of FOLFOXIRI in patients with aPDAC in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

Analyses were derived from all consecutive aPDAC patients treated in L1 between January 2011 and December 2017 in two French institutions, with either FOLFOXIRI (n = 165) or FOLFIRINOX (n = 124) regimens. FOLFOXIRI consisted of irinotecan (165 mg/m²), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²), leucovorin (200 mg/m²) and 5-fluorouracil (3200 mg/m² as a 48-h continuous infusion) every 2 wk. Ninety-six pairs of patients were selected through propensity score matching, and clinical outcomes of the two treatment regimens were compared.

RESULTS

Median overall survival was 11.1 mo in the FOLFOXIRI and 11.6 mo in the FOLFIRINOX cohorts, respectively. After propensity score matching, survival rates remained similar between the two regimens in terms of overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.22; P = 0.219) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.27; P = 0.120). The objective response rate was 37.1% in the FOLFOXIRI group vs 47.8% in the FOLFIRINOX group (P = 0.187). Grade 3/4 toxicities occurred in 28.7% of patients in the FOLFOXIRI cohort vs 19.5% in the FOLFIRINOX cohort (P = 0.079). FOLFOXIRI was associated with a higher incidence of grade 3/4 digestive adverse events. Hematopoietic growth factors were used after each chemotherapy cycle and the low hematological toxicity rates were below 5% with both regimens.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOXIRI is feasible in L1 in patients with aPDAC but does not confer any therapeutic benefit as compared with FOLFIRINOX. The low hematological toxicity rates strengthened the relevance of primary prophylaxis with hematopoietic growth factors.

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.

Current Clinical Strategies of Pancreatic Cancer Treatment and Open Molecular Questions

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal malignancies and is associated with a poor prognosis. Surgery is considered the only potential curative treatment for pancreatic cancer, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, but surgery is reserved for the minority of patients with non-metastatic resectable tumors. In the future, neoadjuvant treatment strategies based on molecular testing of tumor biopsies may increase the amount of patients becoming eligible for surgery. In the context of non-metastatic disease, patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma might benefit from neoadjuvant chemo- or chemoradiotherapy followed by surgeryPatients with locally advanced or (oligo-/poly-)metastatic tumors presenting significant response to (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy should undergo surgery if R0 resection seems to be achievable. New immunotherapeutic strategies to induce potent immune response to the tumors and investigation in molecular mechanisms driving tumorigenesis of pancreatic cancer may provide novel therapeutic opportunities in patients with pancreatic carcinoma and help patient selection for optimal treatment.

First-line chemotherapy regimens for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a Bayesian analysis

Background

Systemic chemotherapy is the standard treatment for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer, but there is no consensus on the optimum regimen. We aimed to compare and rank the locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma chemotherapy regimens evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the past 15 years.

Materials and methods

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Collaboration database, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for RCTs comparing chemotherapy regimens as first-line treatment for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinomas. By using Bayesian network meta-analysis, we compared and ranked all included chemotherapy regimens in terms of overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, and hematological toxicity.

Results

The analysis included 68 RCTs, with 14,908 patients and 63 treatment strategies. For overall survival, NSC-631570 (hazard ratio [HR] vs gemcitabine monotherapy 0.44, 95% credible interval: 0.24–0.76) and gemcitabine+NSC-631570 (HR 0.45, 0.24–0.86) were the two top-ranked chemotherapy regimens. For progression-free survival, PEFG (cisplatin + epirubicin + fluorouracil + gemcitabine) ranked first (HR 0.51, 0.34–0.77). PG (gemcitabine + pemetrexed) (odds ratio [OR] 4.68, 2.24–9.64) and FLEC (fluorouracil + leucovorin + epirubicin + carboplatin) (OR 4.52, 1.14–24.00) were ranked the most hematologically toxic, with gastrazole having the least toxicity (OR 0.03, 0.00–0.46).

Conclusion

The chemotherapy regimens NSC-631570 and gemcitabine+NSC-631570 were ranked the most efficacious for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinomas in terms of overall survival, which warrants further confirmation in large-scale RCTs.

Currently available first-line drug therapies for treating pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the 9th most common cancer in the United States and the 4th most common cause of cancer-related death given its poor prognosis.

AREAS COVERED

The authors have performed a literature search for pertinent published clinical trials, ongoing Phase 3 clinical trials, and current treatment guidelines using PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov, and NCCN, ASCO, ESMO, and JPS websites. The review itself discusses landmark studies and ongoing research into the chemotherapy regimens recommended by each oncologic society. The authors also examine drugs that were promising but failed in Phase 3 trials and those currently being investigated. Finally, the authors provide their expert opinion on the subject and provide their future perspectives.

EXPERT OPINION

While advances in chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer have been limited in comparison to other cancers, there have been improvements in survival. Combination therapy and a goal of R0 resection are key elements to extend life. Novel agents directed at the unique properties of pancreatic cancer are promising.

Can we downstage locally advanced pancreatic cancer to resectable? A phase I/II study of induction oxaliplatin and 5-FU chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

Half of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PC) present with regionally advanced disease. This includes borderline resectable and locally advanced unresectable tumors as defined by current NCCN guidelines for resectability. Chemoradiation (CH-RT) is used in this setting in attempt to control local disease, and possibly downstage to resectable disease. We report a phase I/II trial of a combination of 5FU/Oxaliplatin with concurrent radiation in patients presenting with borderline resectable and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Patients with biopsy-proven borderline resectable or locally advanced unresectable PC were eligible. Chemotherapy included continuous infusion 5FU (200 mg/m2) daily and oxaliplatin weekly for 5 weeks in dose escalation cohorts, ranging from 30 to 60 mg/m2. Concurrent radiation therapy consisted of 4,500 cGy in 25 fractions (180 cGy/fx/d) followed by a comedown to the tumor and margins for an additional 540 cGy ×3 (total dose 5,040 cGy in 28 fractions). Following completion of CH-RT, patients deemed resectable underwent surgery; those who remained unresectable for cure but did not progress (SD, stable disease) received mFOLFOX6 ×6 cycles. Survival was calculated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. End-points of the phase II portion were resectability and overall survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 24 subjects (15 men and 9 women, mean age 64.5 years) were enrolled between June 2004 and December 2009 and received CH-RT. Seventeen patients were enrolled in the Phase I component of the study, fifteen of whom completed neoadjuvant therapy. Reasons for not completing treatment included grade 3 toxicities (1 patient) and withdrawal of consent (1 patient). The highest dose of oxaliplatin (60 mg/m2) was well tolerated and it was used as the recommended phase II dose. An additional 7 patients were treated in the phase II portion, 5 of whom completed CH-RT; the remaining 2 patients did not complete treatment because of grade 3 toxicities. Overall, 4/24 did not complete CH-RT. Grade 4 toxicities related to initial CH-RT were observed during phase I (n=2, pulmonary embolism and lymphopenia) and phase II (n=3, fatigue, leukopenia and thrombocytopenia). Following restaging after completion of CH-RT, 4 patients had progressed (PD); 9 patients had SD and received additional chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6 (one of them had a dramatic response after two cycles and underwent curative resection); the remaining 7 patients (29.2%) were noted to have a response and were explored: 2 had PD, 4 had SD, still unresectable, and 1 patient was resected for cure with negative margins. Overall 2 patients (8.3%) in the study received curative resection following neoadjuvant therapy. Median overall survival for the entire study population was 11.4 months. Overall survival for the two resected patients was 41.7 and 21.6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined modality treatment for borderline resectable and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer with oxaliplatin, 5FU and radiation was reasonably well tolerated. The majority of patients remained unresectable. Survival data with this regimen were comparable to others for locally advanced pancreas cancer, suggesting the need for more novel approaches.

Low-Dose Continuous 5-Fluorouracil Combined with Leucovorin, nab-Paclitaxel, Oxaliplatin, and Bevacizumab for Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Continuous-infusion 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and calcium leucovorin plus nab-paclitaxel and oxaliplatin have been shown to be active in patients with pancreatic cancer. As a protracted low-dose infusion, 5FU is antiangiogenic, and has synergy with bevacizumab. As shown in the treatment of breast cancer, bevacizumab and nab-paclitaxel are also synergetic.

OBJECTIVE

In this paper we retrospectively analyze the survival of 65 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who were treated with low-dose continuous (metronomic) chemotherapy given in conjunction with conventional anti-VEGF therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Since July of 2008, we have treated 65 patients with 5FU (180 mg/m2/day × 14 days) via an ambulatory pump. Calcium leucovorin (20 mg/m2 IV), nab-paclitaxel (60 mg/m2) IV as a 30-min infusion, and oxaliplatin (50 mg/m2) IV as a 60-min infusion were given on days 1, 8, and 15. Bevacizumab (5 mg/kg) IV over 30 min was administered on days 1 and 15. Cycles were repeated every 28-35 days. There were 42 women and 23 men, and the median age was 59 years. Forty-six patients had stage IV disease.

RESULTS

The median survival was 19 months, with 82% of patients surviving 12 months or longer. The overall response rate was 49%. There were 28 patients who had received prior treatment, 15 of whom responded to therapy. Fifty-two patients had elevated CA 19-9 prior to treatment. Of these, 21 patients had 90% or greater reduction in CA 19-9 levels. This cohort had an objective response rate of 71% and a median survival of 27 months. Thirty patients stopped treatment due to disease progression, and an additional 22 stopped because of toxicity. One patient died while on therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

This non-gemcitabine-based regimen resulted in higher response rates and better survival than what is commonly observed with therapy given at conventional dosing schedules. Low-dose continuous (metronomic therapy) cytotoxic chemotherapy combined with antiangiogenic therapy is safe and effective.

Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma neo-adjuvant FOLF(IRIN)OX-based chemotherapy - a multicenter, non-comparative, randomized, phase II trial (PANACHE01-PRODIGE48 study)

BACKGROUND

At time of diagnosis, less than 10% of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are considered to be immediately operable (i.e. resectable). Considering their poor overall survival (OS), only tumours without vascular invasion (NCCN 2017) should be considered for resection, i.e. those for which resection with disease-free margins (R0) is theoretically possible in absence of presurgery treatment. With regard to high R1 rates and undetectable locoregional and/or metastatic spreading prior to surgery explain (at least in part) the observed 1-year relapse and mortality rates of 50 and 25%, respectively. Today, upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is the reference treatment in Europe. The main limitation of the adjuvant approach is the low rate of completion of the full therapeutic sequence. Indeed, only 47 to 60% patients received any adjuvant therapy after resection compared to more than 75% for neoadjuvant therapy. No previous prospective study has compared this approach to a neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or FOLFOX chemotherapy for resectable PDAC.

METHODS

PANACHE01-PRODIGE48 is a prospective multicentre controlled randomized non comparative Phase II trial, evaluating the safety and efficacy of two regimens of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (4 cycles of mFOLFIRINOX or FOLFOX) relative to the current reference treatment (surgery and then adjuvant chemotherapy) in patients with resectable PDAC. The main co-primary endpoints are OS rate at 12 months and the rate of patients undergoing the full therapeutic sequence.

DISCUSSION

The "ideal" cancer treatment for resectable PDAC would have the following characteristics: administration to the highest possible proportion of patients, ability to identify fast-progressing patients (i.e. poor candidates for surgery), a low rate of R1 resections (through optimisation of local disease control), and an acceptable toxicity profile. The neoadjuvant approach may meet all these criteria. With respect to published data on the efficacy of FOLFOX and mFOLFIRINOX, these two regimens are potential candidates for neoadjuvant use in the aim to optimising oncological outcomes in resectable PDAC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02959879 . Trial registration date: November 9, 2016.

Molecular and cellular mechanisms of chemoresistance in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most chemoresistant cancers, and current therapies targeting cancer-associated molecular pathways have not given satisfactory results, owing in part to rapid upregulation of alternative compensatory pathways. Most of the available treatments are palliative, focussing on improving the quality of life. At present, available options are surgery, embolization, radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy and use of other more targeted drugs. In this review, we describe the cellular and molecular effects of current chemotherapy drugs such as gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil [5-FU], oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and leucovorin) and ABRAXANE (nab-Paclitaxel), which have shown a survival benefit, although modest, for pancreatic cancer patients. Nevertheless, gemcitabine remains the standard first-line option for advanced-stage pancreatic cancer patients and, as resistance to the drug has attracted an increasing scientific interest, we deliberate on the main intracellular processes and proteins vital in acquired chemoresistance to gemcitabine. Lastly, our review examines various microenvironmental factors capable of instigating PDAC to develop resistance to chemotherapeutic drugs.

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Over the past few decades, many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review attempts to synthesise all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making when dealing with this difficult disease.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effect of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both for first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival, while secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, grade 3/4 adverse events, therapy response and quality of life.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL (searched 14 June 2017), Embase (1980 to 14 June 2017), MEDLINE (1946 to 14 June 2017) and CANCERLIT (1999 to 2002) databases. We also handsearched all relevant conference abstracts published up until 14 June 2017.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised studies assessing overall survival outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy, alone or in combination, were the eligible treatments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently analysed studies, and a third settled any disputes. We extracted data on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rates, adverse events (AEs) and quality of life (QoL), and we assessed risk of bias for each study.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 studies addressing chemotherapy in 9463 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. We did not identify any eligible studies on radiotherapy.We did not find any benefit for chemotherapy over best supportive care. However, two identified studies did not have sufficient data to be included in the analysis, and many of the chemotherapy regimens studied were outdated.Compared to gemcitabine alone, participants receiving 5FU had worse OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.92) and QoL. On the other hand, two studies showed FOLFIRINOX was better than gemcitabine for OS (HR 0.51 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60, moderate-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.57) and response rates (RR 3.38, 95% CI 2.01 to 5.65), but it increased the rate of side effects. The studies evaluating CO-101, ZD9331 and exatecan did not show benefit or harm when compared with gemcitabine alone.Giving gemcitabine at a fixed dose rate improved OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94, high-quality evidence) but increased the rate of side effects when compared with bolus dosing.When comparing gemcitabine combinations to gemcitabine alone, gemcitabine plus platinum improved PFS (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.68 to 0.95) and response rates (RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.98) but not OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08, low-quality evidence). The rate of side effects increased. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improved OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95), PFS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.72 to 0.87) and response rates (RR 1.78, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.47, high-quality evidence), but it also increased side effects. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitor did not improve survival outcomes but did increase toxicity. One study demonstrated that gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel improved OS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.84, high-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.82) and response rates (RR 3.29, 95% CI 2.24 to 4.84) but increased side effects. Gemcitabine-containing multi-drug combinations (GEMOXEL or cisplatin/epirubicin/5FU/gemcitabine) improved OS (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79, low-quality evidence), PFS (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.62) and QOL.We did not find any survival advantages when comparing 5FU combinations to 5FU alone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination chemotherapy has recently overtaken the long-standing gemcitabine as the standard of care. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are highly efficacious, but our analysis shows that other combination regimens also offer a benefit. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individual patients still remains difficult, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to help rationalise treatment selection for patients.

What treatment in 2017 for inoperable pancreatic cancers?

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a frequent and severe disease, either diagnosed as metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA) or as locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC). Though no improvement in patients outcome have been made between 1996 and 2011, since 5 years new treatment options have become available to treat our patients. New standard first line regimens, such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine combined with nab-paclitaxel, have improved overall survivals and second line treatments have been tested and validated. Other first-line treatments have failed, but research remains active and trials are ongoing with promising new anti-cancer agents. These new effective regimens used for MPA have yielded promising results in LAPC patients in open cohorts or phase II trials and a recent trial have failed to demonstrate the added value of classical external radiotherapy in this setting. Here, we review current standards of care in LAPC and MPA, consider the latest challenges and strategic questions, and examine what we may hope for in the future.

Combination Cancer Therapy Can Confer Benefit via Patient-to-Patient Variability without Drug Additivity or Synergy

Combination cancer therapies aim to improve the probability and magnitude of therapeutic responses and reduce the likelihood of acquired resistance in an individual patient. However, drugs are tested in clinical trials on genetically diverse patient populations. We show here that patient-to-patient variability and independent drug action are sufficient to explain the superiority of many FDA-approved drug combinations in the absence of drug synergy or additivity. This is also true for combinations tested in patient-derived tumor xenografts. In a combination exhibiting independent drug action, each patient benefits solely from the drug to which his or her tumor is most sensitive, with no added benefit from other drugs. Even when drug combinations exhibit additivity or synergy in pre-clinical models, patient-to-patient variability and low cross-resistance make independent action the dominant mechanism in clinical populations. This insight represents a different way to interpret trial data and a different way to design combination therapies.

Capecitabine and oxaliplatin as first and second line treatment for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Background

There are limited treatment options available for patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We conducted a phase II study evaluating the efficacy and safety of capecitabine/oxaliplatin (CAPOX) in patients with locally advanced and metastatic PDAC treated in the first and second lines.

Methods

Forty subjects with advanced PDAC and ECOG performance status ≥2 were enrolled. Treatment consisted of capecitabine 2,000 mg/m² orally in two divided doses daily for 14 days and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m² intravenously day 1 every 21 days. The primary endpoint was response rate (RR); secondary endpoints included safety analysis, progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

The overall RR was 12.5% (N=3); the disease control rate was 67% (N=16). Due to the protocol definition for eligibility of response evaluation, only 60% (N=24) were evaluable for the primary endpoint. Median progression free survival (mPFS) was 3.8 months (95% CI: 1.3, 6.2); median OS (mOS) was 7.4 months (95% CI: 4.8, 12.2). The most common grade 3/4 toxicities included: fatigue (19%), nausea (17%), and diarrhea (14%).

Conclusions

CAPOX is an active regimen in patients with advanced PDAC and is associated with acceptable toxicity. Careful consideration should be given to response endpoints and outcome measures when studying this characteristically ill population.

Current Standards of Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE

Pancreatic cancer has a dismal prognosis due to the early development of systemic metastatic disease. Chemotherapeutic agents are the only systemic therapy that offers patients meaningful benefit.

METHODS

This study reviewed the literature for recently published Phase III clinical trials whose results have guided the current standards of chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

FINDINGS

Although combination chemotherapy regimens are shown to be superior to gemcitabine monotherapy for both metastatic pancreatic cancer and adjuvant chemotherapy after surgical resection, it should be recognized that all combination chemotherapy regimens offer only limited benefits. In addition, there is a paucity of clinical trials that directly compare the various combination chemotherapy regimens.

IMPLICATIONS

With the advancement of systemic cancer treatment beyond chemotherapy, it is important to devote more investigation into better understanding the biology of these chemotherapy regimens, such that we combine them with targeted therapeutics and immunotherapeutics in a rational and scientific manner. For the current treatment of pancreatic cancer, the available chemotherapy regimens have shown modest but statistically significant improvements in survival. However, it is important to avoid cross-comparisons of trials and choose regimens based on patient characteristics and the side-effect profiles of the regimen.

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Current and Evolving Therapies

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which constitutes 90% of pancreatic cancers, is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the world. Due to the broad heterogeneity of genetic mutations and dense stromal environment, PDAC belongs to one of the most chemoresistant cancers. Most of the available treatments are palliative, with the objective of relieving disease-related symptoms and prolonging survival. Currently, available therapeutic options are surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and use of targeted drugs. However, thus far, therapies targeting cancer-associated molecular pathways have not given satisfactory results; this is due in part to the rapid upregulation of compensatory alternative pathways as well as dense desmoplastic reaction. In this review, we summarize currently available therapies and clinical trials, directed towards a plethora of pathways and components dysregulated during PDAC carcinogenesis. Emerging trends towards targeted therapies as the most promising approach will also be discussed.

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.

Inside the biochemical pathways of thymidylate synthase perturbed by anticancer drugs: Novel strategies to overcome cancer chemoresistance

Our current understanding of the mechanisms of action of antitumor agents and the precise mechanisms underlying drug resistance is that these two processes are directly linked. Moreover, it is often possible to delineate chemoresistance mechanisms based on the specific mechanism of action of a given anticancer drug. A more holistic approach to the chemoresistance problem suggests that entire metabolic pathways, rather than single enzyme targets may better explain and educate us about the complexity of the cellular responses upon cytotoxic drug administration. Drugs, which target thymidylate synthase and folate-dependent enzymes, represent an important therapeutic arm in the treatment of various human malignancies. However, prolonged patient treatment often provokes drug resistance phenomena that render the chemotherapeutic treatment highly ineffective. Hence, strategies to overcome drug resistance are primarily designed to achieve either enhanced intracellular drug accumulation, to avoid the upregulation of folate-dependent enzymes, and to circumvent the impairment of DNA repair enzymes which are also responsible for cross-resistance to various anticancer drugs. The current clinical practice based on drug combination therapeutic regimens represents the most effective approach to counteract drug resistance. In the current paper, we review the molecular aspects of the activity of TS-targeting drugs and describe how such mechanisms are related to the emergence of clinical drug resistance. We also discuss the current possibilities to overcome drug resistance by using a molecular mechanistic approach based on medicinal chemistry methods focusing on rational structural modifications of novel antitumor agents. This paper also focuses on the importance of the modulation of metabolic pathways upon drug administration, their analysis and the assessment of their putative roles in the networks involved using a meta-analysis approach. The present review describes the main pathways that are modulated by TS-targeting anticancer drugs starting from the description of the normal functioning of the folate metabolic pathway, through the protein modulation occurring upon drug delivery to cultured tumor cells as well as cancer patients, finally describing how the pathways are modulated by drug resistance development. The data collected are then analyzed using network/netwire connecting methods in order to provide a wider view of the pathways involved and of the importance of such information in identifying additional proteins that could serve as novel druggable targets for efficacious cancer therapy.

Neoadjuvant gemcitabine, docetaxel, and capecitabine followed by gemcitabine and capecitabine/radiation therapy and surgery in locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This prospective study was undertaken to assess toxicity, resectability, and survival in pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients presenting with locally advanced, unresectable disease treated with neoadjuvant gemcitabine, docetaxel, and capecitabine (GTX) and gemcitabine and capecitabine (GX)/radiation therapy (RT).

METHODS

All patients presenting to the Pancreas Center were evaluated for eligibility. Forty-five patients (mean age, 64 years; range, 44-83 years)-34 patients deemed unresectable because of arterial involvement and 11 patients deemed unresectable because of extensive venous involvement-were treated with 6 cycles of GTX. Those with arterial involvement were treated with GX/RT after chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The GTX and GX/RT treatments were tolerated with the expected drug-related toxicities. There were no bowel perforations, cases of pancreatitis, or delayed strictures. Among those with arterial involvement, 29 underwent subsequent resection, with 20 (69%) achieving R0 resections. All 11 patients with venous-only involvement underwent resection, with 8 achieving R0 resections and 3 achieving complete pathologic responses. For the arterial arm, the 1-year survival rate was 71% (24 of 34 patients), and the median survival was 29 months (95% confidence interval, 21-38 months). Thirteen patients (38%) have not relapsed (range, 5-49+ months). For the venous arm, the median survival has not been reached at more than 42 months. Six patients (55%) in the venous arm did not experience recurrence (range, 6.2-42+ months).

CONCLUSIONS

GTX plus GX/RT is an effective neoadjuvant regimen that can be safely administered to patients up to at least the age of 83 years. It is associated with a high response rate, a high rate of R0 resections, and prolonged overall survival.

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.

Role of solute carrier transporters in pancreatic cancer: a review

Nucleoside analogs such as gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil are currently the cornerstone of chemotherapy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Decreased drug transport into tumor cells that may be caused by low expression of membrane proteins, such as solute carrier transporters, represents one of the principal mechanisms of chemotherapy resistance. Individual diversity of multidrug resistance is the major challenge limiting the success of anticancer treatment. Novel biomarkers and pharmacogenomic approaches could further optimize treatment algorithms leading to better survival and lower treatment toxicity in PDAC patients. In this review, the most promising predictive biomarkers from the solute carrier transporter family of membrane transporters and the potential applications for PDAC therapy with nucleoside analogues are summarized.

Sequential FOLFOX-6 and gemcitabine for locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic cancer

This prospective phase II trial aims to evaluate the sequential FOLFOX-6 and gemcitabine followed by adapted maintenance for advanced pancreatic cancer. Treatment included FOLFOX-6 for 4 cycles, followed sequentially by gemcitabine for 3 cycles. Patients, who show clinical benefit after both sequences, will receive maintenance treatment based on the investigator's discretion. From January 2005 to June 2008, 32 patients with median age of 63 were included; 75% of patients had metastatic disease, 81% had pure adenocarcinoma, while 19% had adenocarcinoma with a neuroendocrine component. There were 22% PR and 22% SD resulting in 44% tumor growth control. Under FOLFOX, grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia in 8 patients, thrombocytopenia and anemia in 3 patients each, and diarrhea in 2 patients. Under Gem, grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in 4 patients, thrombocytopenia and anemia were observed in 2 patients, and hand-foot syndrome was observed in 3 patients. The median TTP and OS were 4 and 10 months, respectively. In APC, FOLFOX-6 regimen followed by gemcitabine achieved an interesting RR within a tolerable level of toxicity. This regimen seems to warrant further investigation to confirm its efficacy.

Systemic treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer belongs to the most malignant gastrointestinal cancers and, in its advanced stage, remains a deadly disease for nearly all affected patients. Treatment of metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas not only involves chemotherapy and targeted therapy, but also requires attention to accompanying comorbidities as well as frequently intensive supportive treatment and psychosocial support. Gemcitabine-based combinations with fluoropyrimidines and platin analogs have essentially failed to provide a substantial prolongation of survival and may constitute a treatment option only in patients with a good performance status. Among targeted therapies, only the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib has shown activity which is marginal in the overall population, but clinically relevant in patients developing skin rash. New avenues of polychemotherapy are presently explored since the gemcitabine-free FOLFIRINOX-regimen (infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin) was shown to be markedly superior to gemcitabine in selected good-performance patients. Pancreatic cancer is notably characterized as a hypovascular tumor rich in desmoplastic stromal tissue. An innovative approach to treatment therefore focuses on peritumoral fibroblasts and aims to induce a depletion of the stroma either by inhibition of the hedgehog pathway or by targeting SPARC (secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine) via application of albumin-bound paclitaxel.

Combinational therapy: new hope for pancreatic cancer?

Pancreatic cancer is a devastating disease with a low overall survival rate. Chemotherapy is the most common treatment for patients presenting with advanced pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine achieves a modest improvement in overall survival and is the gold standard for advanced pancreatic cancer treatment. Capecitabine and S-1, derivatives of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), offers minimal clinical benefits. Folfirinox represents a new and aggressive regimen that might benefit patients of metastatic pancreatic cancer with good performance status. Other chemotherapy drugs such as platinums and irinotecan do not provide significant improvement in overall survival, but have been used as part of combinational therapies. Comparing to systemically delivered chemotherapy, regional intra-arterial chemotherapy achieves higher local drug concentration in tumors with lower systemic drug toxicity, and may serve as a better treatment regimen. Although there have been progress made in chemotherapeutic strategies against pancreatic cancer, the overall survival is not significantly improved in the last decade. Recently, development of chemotherapy in combination with molecular targeted therapies holds great promise in pancreatic cancer treatment, especially in patients with metastatic disease. Growing bodies of preclinical and clinical evidences indicate that the combination of conventional modalities with specific molecular targeted therapy increase the efficacy of the monotherapy without an increase in toxicity. In this review, we summarized the current regimens of chemotherapy and molecular targeted therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer and highlighted the novel combinational treatments tested in recent clinical trials.

Phase I/II study of gemcitabine as a fixed dose rate infusion and S-1 combination therapy (FGS) in gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer patients

PURPOSE

There is no standard regimen for gemcitabine (Gem)-refractory pancreatic cancer (PC) patients. In a previous phase II trial, S-1 was found to exhibit marginal efficacy. Gem administration by fixed dose rate infusion of 10 mg/m(2)/min (FDR-Gem) should maximize the rate of intracellular accumulation of gemcitabine triphosphate and might improve clinical efficacy. We conducted the phase I/II of FDR-Gem and S-1 (FGS) in patients with Gem-refractory PC.

METHODS

The patients received FDR-Gem on day 1 and S-1 orally twice daily on days 1-7. Cycles were repeated every 14 days. Patients were scheduled to receive Gem (mg/m(2)/week) and S-1 (mg/m(2)/day) at four dose levels in the phase I: 800/80 (level 1), 1,000/80 (level 2), 1,200/80 (level 3) and 1,200/100 (level 4). Forty patients were enrolled in the phase II study at recommended dose.

RESULTS

The recommended dose was the level 3. In the phase II, a partial response has been confirmed in seven patients (18%). The median overall survival time and median progression-free survival time are 7.0 and 2.8 months, respectively. The common adverse reactions were anorexia, leukocytopenia and neutropenia.

CONCLUSION

This combination regimen of FGS is active and well tolerated in patients with Gem-refractory PC.

Metastatic pancreatic cancer: old drugs, new paradigms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma has a grim prognosis and gemcitabine has been the reference treatment for 15 years. In this article, we will review current first-line treatments for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma focusing on randomized studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Among the numerous randomized phase III studies comparing gemcitabine as single agent to gemcitabine combined to a new agent, only the gemcitabine-erlotinib combination has shown a small, but statistical improvement in survival. A trend to better survival was also observed with a gemcitabine-capecitabine regimen. The use of low-weight heparin may be of value to reduce venous thromboembolic events. In selected patients with good performance status ECOG 0-1, the Folfirinox regimen, when compared with gemcitabine, was associated with more toxicities and significantly increased median survival from 6.8 to 11.1 months.

SUMMARY

Gemcitabine (with or without erlotinib or capecitabine) is still the reference treatment in patients with ECOG performance status 2. Folfirinox is a new more toxic and more efficient regimen that may be considered in patients with good performance status.

FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as compared with gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

We randomly assigned 342 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 (on a scale of 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater severity of illness) to receive FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg per square meter of body-surface area; irinotecan, 180 mg per square meter; leucovorin, 400 mg per square meter; and fluorouracil, 400 mg per square meter given as a bolus followed by 2400 mg per square meter given as a 46-hour continuous infusion, every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter weekly for 7 of 8 weeks and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. Six months of chemotherapy were recommended in both groups in patients who had a response. The primary end point was overall survival.

RESULTS

The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the FOLFIRINOX group as compared with 6.8 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.73; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 6.4 months in the FOLFIRINOX group and 3.3 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.59; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 31.6% in the FOLFIRINOX group versus 9.4% in the gemcitabine group (P<0.001). More adverse events were noted in the FOLFIRINOX group; 5.4% of patients in this group had febrile neutropenia. At 6 months, 31% of the patients in the FOLFIRINOX group had a definitive degradation of the quality of life versus 66% in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.70; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

As compared with gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX was associated with a survival advantage and had increased toxicity. FOLFIRINOX is an option for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and good performance status. (Funded by the French government and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00112658.).

Medical treatment of pancreatic cancer: new hopes after 10 years of gemcitabine

Exocrine pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis. R0 resection of the tumor is to date the only potentially curative approach, but less than 20% of patients are eligible for a curative surgery at diagnosis. Until recently, gemcitabine was the standard treatment for advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer patients, since it was shown more than a decade ago to induce clinical benefit and to improve survival when compared to weekly bolus 5-fluorouracil. In order to improve patients' outcome many trials have, during the last 10 years, explored the pharmacokinetic modulation of gemcitabine and combination therapies with gemcitabine and other anti-cancer agents with consistent negative results. It is finally a trial assessing the efficacy of a combination chemotherapy without gemcitabine: the FOLFIRINOX regimen, reported this year, that has shown for the first time a significant improvement in progression free and overall survivals. In parallel, many trials testing new targeted agents in these patients are currently ongoing. After 10 years without significant progress in the treatment of pancreatic cancer patients, the hope that a significant improvement in the outcome of these patients can be achieved has been raised.

Prospective phase I study of capecitabine and oxaliplatin concurrent with radiation therapy for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and retrospective comparison to concurrent 5-fluorouracil/radiation and gemcitabine/radiation

PURPOSE

The aims of this study is to determine the maximum tolerated dose of capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) delivered concurrent with radiation therapy (RT) in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to retrospectively compare outcomes with this regimen to concurrent 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine with RT (5FU-RT) or concurrent gemcitabine-based chemotherapy with RT (GEM-RT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twelve patients were enrolled in a phase I study using 50.4 Gy RT concurrent with capecitabine chemotherapy (twice daily, 7 days per week) and oxaliplatin (once weekly during weeks 1, 2, 4, and 5). Capecitabine and oxaliplatin doses were 400 mg/m(2) and 50 mg/m(2), respectively, at dose level 1; 600 mg/m(2) and 50 mg/m(2) at level 2; and 600 mg/m(2) and 60 mg/m(2) at level 3. A standard dose of gemcitabine was recommended following RT or following surgery (if done). The outcomes of patients treated with this regimen were retrospectively compared to 20 patients treated with 5FU-RT and 30 patients treated with GEM-RT.

RESULTS

Dose level 3 was tolerated with acceptable toxicity. Survival in patients receiving CAPOX-RT did not differ from GEM-RT or 5FU-RT. Response of the primary tumor was observed in 38% of patients treated with CAPOX-RT, 31% of patients treated with 5FU-RT, and 66% of patients treated with GEM-RT (p = 0.03 GEM-RT versus 5FU-RT).

CONCLUSIONS

CAPOX-RT has acceptable toxicity. A retrospective comparison shows higher response rate with GEM-RT versus 5FU-RT, but this difference did not translate into improvement in overall survival.

Recent developments in palliative chemotherapy for locally advanced and metastatic pancreas cancer

In spite of advances made in the management of the other more common cancers of the gastrointestinal tract, significant progress in the treatment of pancreatic cancer remains elusive. Nearly as many deaths occur from pancreatic cancer as are diagnosed each year reflecting the poor prognosis typically associated with this disease. Until recently, the only treatment with an impact on survival was surgery. In the palliative setting, gemcitabine (Gem) has been a standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer since it was shown a decade ago to result in a superior clinical benefit response and survival compared with bolus 5-fluorouracil. Since then, clinical trials have explored the pharmacokinetic modulation of Gem by fixed dose administration and the combination of Gem with other cytotoxic or the biologically "targeted" agents. However, promising trial results in small phase II trials have not translated into survival improvements in larger phase III randomized trials in the advanced disease setting. Two trials have recently reported modest survival improvements with the use of combination treatment with Gem and capecitabine (United Kingdom National Cancer Research GEMCAP trial) or erlotinib (National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group PA.3 trial). This review will focus on the use of systemic therapy for advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer, summarizing the results of several recent clinical trials and discuss their implications for clinical practice. We will also discuss briefly the second-line chemotherapy options for advanced pancreatic cancer.

WITHDRAWN: Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for inoperable advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer has a poor prognosis. The benefit of chemotherapy, radiotherapy or both as a palliative treatment of advanced or relapsed disease is uncertain.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy in the management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma in people with inoperable advanced disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), which includes the Cochrane Upper Gastrointestinal and Pancreatic Diseases (UGPD) Group Trials Register (The Cochrane Library 2005, Issue 1); CANCERLIT (1975-2002); MEDLINE (1966 to January 2005); and EMBASE (1980 to January 2005). We handsearched reference lists from trials revealed by electronic searches to identify further relevant trials. We searched published abstracts from relevant conference proceedings. We contacted colleagues and experts in the field, and asked them to provide details of outstanding clinical trials and any relevant unpublished materials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (single- or double-blind) in patients with advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer, in which one of the intervention types (chemotherapy or radiotherapy) was contrasted with either placebo or another type of intervention. Studies comparing non-chemotherapy agents such as biological agents, hormones, immunostimulants, vaccines and cytokines were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Studies were assessed for eligibility and quality. Data were extracted by groups of two independent reviewers, with conflicts resolved by a third reviewer. Study authors were contacted for more information.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty trials (7043 participants) were included. Chemotherapy significantly reduced the one-year mortality (odds ratio (OR) 0.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.25 to 0.57, P value < 0.00001) when compared to best supportive care. Also, chemoradiation improved one year survival (0% versus 58%, P value 0.001) when compared to best supportive care. There was no significant difference in one-year mortality for 5FU alone versus 5FU combinations (OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.30); single-agent chemotherapy versus gemcitabine (OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.02, P value 0.17); or gemcitabine alone versus gemcitabine combinations (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.05). However, subgroup analysis showed that platinum-gemcitabine combinations reduced six-month mortality compared to gemcitabine alone (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.81, P value 0.001). A qualitative overview suggested that chemoradiation produced better survivals than either best supportive care or radiotherapy. Chemoradiation treatment was associated with more toxicity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Chemotherapy appears to prolong survival in people with advanced pancreatic cancer and can confer clinical benefits and improve quality of life. Combination chemotherapy did not improve overall survival compared to single-agent chemotherapy. Gemcitabine is an acceptable control arm for future trials investigating scheduling and combinations with novel agents. There is insufficient evidence to recommend chemoradiation in patients with locally advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer as a superior alternative to chemotherapy alone.

Current state of adjuvant therapy in resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic carcinoma cannot generally be cured by surgery alone. This review summarizes the development of adjuvant therapy over the past two decades. Four randomized controlled trials compare long-term survival of different treatments. The small GITSG-study supports combined chemoradiation, but the EORTC-study found no significant effect. A Norwegian study of adjuvant chemotherapy found an increased median survival, but no effect beyond two years. The large ESPAC-1 study shows a benefit for 5-FU based chemotherapy, while chemoradiation had a negative effect. Thus, evidence favours adjuvant therapy, but 5-FU may not be the ultimate drug. Support for gemcitabine is given by preliminary data from a German randomized trial, and further American and European studies are upcoming. However, postoperative therapy is problematic, as 20-30% of resected patients never undergo treatment because of slow recovery or other reasons. Preoperative therapy has some theoretical advantages, and moreover, patients with rapidly progressive disease may be spared surgery. Randomized controlled trials are lacking, but published results compare well with postoperative, adjuvant therapy. The value of locally targeted therapy is difficult to assess. Reasonable results have been obtained with regional chemotherapy, whereas intraoperative radiotherapy does not seem to increase survival despite reducing reducing local recurrences.

Oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and leucovorin as second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

A phase II study was performed to assess the activity of oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) modulated by leucovorin, as second-line treatment in locally advanced or metastatic pancreas adenocarcinoma pretreated with gemcitabine-containing schedule.

METHODS

Patients received weekly intravenous infusions of oxaliplatin 40 mg/m, 5-FU 500 mg/m, and leucovorin 250 mg/m (3 weeks on, 1 week off).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients affected with metastatic (16) or locally advanced (7) pancreas adenocarcinoma were involved in this study. A total of 148 weeks of chemotherapy was delivered (median 2 courses each patient). Among 17 assessable patients, no objective response was registered and 4 patients had stable disease, whereas 13 had tumor progression. Median duration of stable disease was 14 weeks. Median time to progression of disease (TTP) was 11.6 weeks [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.6-5.6]. Kaplan-Meier estimated median overall survival (OS) was 17.1 week (95% CI, 4.0-30.1) and 3 months survival rate was 69.6%. Seven patients experienced grade 3 to 4 toxicity. The regimen was associated with 36% clinical benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

The median TTP and median OS in this population with poor prognosis suggests some activity, however, only further investigations will be able to establish the clinical value of this combination.

Phase II trial of S-1 in combination with gemcitabine for chemo-naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

We performed a phase II study of combination chemotherapy with S-1 plus gemcitabine for treating chemo-naïve patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with histologically confirmed unresectable pancreatic cancer were eligible. The treatment consisted of S-1 (40 mg/m(2) p.o. b.i.d. from D1 to 14) and gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m(2) on D1 and 8), repeated every 3 weeks.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were enrolled between March 2005 and December 2007. No complete response was observed and a partial response was observed in 14 patients (44.0%), stable disease in eight patients (25.0%), and progressive disease in eight patients (25.0%). The median time to progression was 4.92 months (95% CI: 4.16-5.67 months), and the median overall survival was 7.89 months (95% CI: 5.96-9.82 months). The survival duration was significantly longer for the patients with a good performance status compared with that of the patients with a poor performance status. The major toxicities were grade 3-4 neutropenia (9, 28.1%), grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (5, 15.6%), and grade 3 diarrhea (5, 15.6%).

CONCLUSION

The combination chemotherapy of S-1 and gemcitabine showed promising antitumor activity and manageable toxicities, and especially for the good performance status patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Complete remission of a metastatic pancreatic carcinoma after modified G-FLIP therapy

This is a report about a patient who had a complete remission of a metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after a modified G-FLIP therapy administered in an outpatient setting. The patient underwent surgery and the complete remission could be proven histologically. The administered chemotherapy was very effective and is even more attractive since it could be administered without admission to hospital.

Meta-analyses of chemotherapy for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

There are a large number of randomized controlled trials involving chemotherapy in the management of advanced pancreatic cancer. Several chemotherapeutic agents, either alone or in combination with other chemotherapy or novel agents, have been used. The aim of these meta-analyses was to examine the different therapeutic approaches, and the comparisons examined were as follows: chemotherapy versus best supportive care; fluorouracil (FU) versus FU combination chemotherapy; gemcitabine versus FU; and gemcitabine versus gemcitabine combination chemotherapy.

METHODS

Relevant trials were identified by searching databases, trial registers, and conference proceedings. The primary end point was overall survival.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen randomized controlled trials were identified, of which 51 trials involving 9,970 patients met the inclusion criteria. Chemotherapy improved survival compared with best supportive care (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.98). FU-based combination chemotherapy did not result in better overall survival compared with FU alone (HR = 0.94; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.08). There was insufficient evidence of a survival difference between gemcitabine and FU, but the wide CI includes clinically important differences in both directions, making a clear conclusion difficult (HR = 0.75; 95% CI, 0.42 to 1.31). Survival was improved after gemcitabine combination chemotherapy compared with gemcitabine alone (HR = 0.91; 95% CI, 0.85 to 0.97).

CONCLUSION

There was a significant survival benefit for chemotherapy over best supportive care and gemcitabine combinations over gemcitabine alone. This supports the use of gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.