Hyperprogressive disease during PD-1 blockade in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

The occurrence of markedly accelerated tumor growth during immunotherapy is considered a new mode of progression called hyperprogressive disease (HPD) and its impact on pancreatic cancer (PC) patients receiving immunotherapy is unknown. In this study, we described and explored the incidence, prognosis and predictors of HPD in patients with advanced PC treated with programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors. We retrospectively analyzed clinicopathological data from 104 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who were treated with PD-1 inhibitors at our institution during 2015-2020 and identified 10 (9.6%) patients with HPD. Overall survival (OS) was significantly poorer in patients with HPD compared to patients with progressive disease (PD) (median OS: 5.6 vs. 3.6 months, p < .01). Clinicopathological factors associated with the occurrence of HPD included smoking, metastatic sites >2, liver metastasis, antibiotic therapy within 21 days before immunotherapy (Abx B21), hemoglobin (Hb) level <110 g/L, and PD-1 inhibitor treatment line >2. Subgroup analysis showed that high levels of CA19-9 at baseline were associated with the development of subsequent HPD (p = .024) and a worse prognosis (mOS:16.2 months vs. 6.1 months, p < .01). Our study demonstrated that HPD may occur in PC patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors and is associated with several clinicopathological characteristics and poor prognosis. The baseline tumor marker CA19-9 may be one of the early predictors of HPD development in PC patients receiving immunotherapy.

Prior irinotecan exposure does not preclude benefit to liposomal irinotecan in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Subgroup analyses of the NAPOLI-1 study identified that among patients who were irinotecan naïve prior to entering the clinical trial, a survival benefit was observed between the study arm and control arm. This treatment benefit was not observed among those previously exposed to irinotecan. This study sought to understand the impact of prior exposure to irinotecan on clinical outcomes among patients treated with liposomal irinotecan in the real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study utilized a nationwide electronic health record (EHR)-derived deidentified database. Data for adult patients with mPDAC treated with liposomal irinotecan-based regimens between January 2016 and October 2020 were analyzed. Patient characteristics, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed. Cox proportional hazard methods were used to calculate hazard ratios (HRs). HRs were adjusted for demographics and relevant clinical covariates.

RESULTS

Six hundred and seventy-five patients with mPDAC treated with a liposomal irinotecan-based regimen were included. The unadjusted OS HR was 1.3 (95% CI: 1.1-1.6, p < 0.001) and unadjusted PFS was HR 1.4 (95% CI: 1.2-1.7, p < 0.001). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, the adjusted OS HR was 1.0 (95% CI: 0.8-1.3, p = 0.8836) and the adjusted PFS HR was 1.1 (95% CI: 0.8-1.4, p = 0.5626).

CONCLUSIONS

Prior irinotecan was not found to be a significant predictor of patient outcomes in those later treated with liposomal irinotecan. Thus, the results may inform the rationale for utilizing liposomal irinotecan combination therapy following prior irinotecan exposure in mPDAC, in particular where the prior irinotecan exposure was more distant in time.

Multidisciplinary team diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer: Current landscape and future prospects

The pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer has not been completely clear, there is no highly sensitive and specific detection method, so early diagnosis is very difficult. Despite the rapid development of tumor diagnosis and treatment, it is difficult to break through in the short term and the overall 5-year survival rate of pancreatic cancer is less than 8%. In the face of the increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, in addition to strengthening basic research, exploring its etiology and pathogenesis, it is urgent to optimize the existing diagnosis and treatment methods through standard multidisciplinary team (MDT), and formulate personalized treatment plan to achieve the purpose of improving the curative effect. However, there are some problems in MDT, such as insufficient understanding and enthusiasm of some doctors, failure to operate MDT according to the system, lack of good communication between domestic and foreign peers, and lack of attention in personnel training and talent echelon construction. It is expected to protect the rights and interests of doctors in the future and ensure the continuous operation of MDT. To strengthen the research on the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer, MDT can try the Internet +MDT mode to improve the efficiency of MDT.

Survival prediction for patients with malignant biliary obstruction caused by pancreatic cancer undergoing biliary drainage: the COMBO-PaS model

BACKGROUND

Patients with pancreatic cancer-caused biliary obstruction (PC-BO) have poor prognosis, but we lack of tools to predict survival for clinical decision-making. This study aims to establish a model for survival prediction among patients with PC-BO.

METHODS

A total of 172 patients with PC-BO treated with percutaneous biliary drainage were randomly divided into a training group (n = 120) and a validation group (n = 52). The independent risk factors for overall survival were selected to develop a Cox model. The predictive performance of M stage, hepatic metastases, cancer antigen 199, and the Cox model was determined. Naples prognostic score (NPS), the prognostic nutritional index (PNI), and the controlling nutritional status (CONUT) for 1-month mortality risk were compared with the Cox model.

RESULTS

The Cox model was developed based on total cholesterol, direct bilirubin, hepatic metastases, cancer antigen 199, stenosis type, and preprocedural infection (all P < 0.05), which named "COMBO-PaS." The COMBO-PaS model had the highest area under the curves (AUC) (0.801-0.933) comparing with other predictors (0.506-0.740) for 1-, 3-, and 6-month survival prediction. For 1-month mortality risk prediction, the COMBO-PaS model had the highest AUC of 0.829 comparing with NPS, PNI, and CONUT.

CONCLUSION

The COMBO-PaS model was useful for survival prediction among patients with PC-BO.

Resection of pancreatic adenocarcinomas with synchronous liver metastases: A retrospective study of prognostic factors for survival

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate the results of synchronous liver resection for metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas and to identify prognostic factors for overall survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed clinical data from patients who underwent the synchronous resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma with liver metastases. Cox analyses were used to identify factors prognostic of overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 92 patients included in this study, preoperative chemotherapy was administered to 52 patients. The median overall survival was 18.26 months (95% confidence interval: 14.7-22.7) (from diagnosis) and 12.68 months (95% confidence interval: 9.5-15.57) from surgery; overall survival at 1, 3, and 5 years was 70%, 10%, and 0%, respectively. Twenty-eight patients (30.4%) had median overall survival >18 months after surgery. The median overall survival from diagnosis was longer in patients undergoing preoperative treatment (22.7 vs 13.8 months; P = .01) but similar after surgery (12.6 vs 13.8 months; P = .86). Multivariate Cox analysis found CA19-9 levels <500 kU/L (hazard ratio: 0.35; 95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.70; P = .003), R0 resection (hazard ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval: 0.24-0.88; P = .020), and adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio: 0.39; 95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.88; P = .024) as independent prognostic factors for overall survival.

CONCLUSION

Survival after resection of oligometastatic liver disease remains limited, reflecting the dismal prognosis of metastatic disease even after aggressive treatment. Preresection CA19-9 serum levels represent a useful tool for patient selection, and administration of adjuvant chemotherapy has a major impact on overall survival. Large comparative studies with exclusive chemotherapy are needed to validate this approach and to identify optimal candidates.

Prognostic models to predict survival in patients with pancreatic cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has poor survival. Current treatments offer little likelihood of cure or long-term survival. This systematic review evaluates prognostic models predicting overall survival in patients diagnosed with PDAC.

METHODS

We conducted a comprehensive search of eight electronic databases from their date of inception through to December 2019. Studies that published models predicting survival in patients with PDAC were identified.

RESULTS

3297 studies were identified; 187 full-text articles were retrieved and 54 studies of 49 unique prognostic models were included. Of these, 28 (57.1%) were conducted in patients with advanced disease, 17 (34.7%) with resectable disease, and four (8.2%) in all patients. 34 (69.4%) models were validated, and 35 (71.4%) reported model discrimination, with only five models reporting values >0.70 in both derivation and validation cohorts. Many (n = 27) had a moderate to high risk of bias and most (n = 33) were developed using retrospective data. No variables were unanimously found to be predictive of survival when included in more than one study.

CONCLUSION

Most prognostic models were developed using retrospective data and performed poorly. Future research should validate instruments performing well locally in international cohorts and investigate other potential predictors of survival.

The application of the Glasgow prognostic score to predict the survival in patients with metastatic pancreatic carcinoma

Objectives:

Thither is a more pressing effort to think about chemotherapy (CTx) in second-line and beyond in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). The current work aimed to evaluate the value of the Glasgow prognostic score (GPS) and modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS) to predict the survival in patients receiving second-line CTx protocol.

Material and Methods:

We retrospectively reviewed the patients’ medical files with mPC who received second-line CTx protocol between September 2013 and December 2017. The GPS/mGPS graded from 0 to 2 based on C-reactive protein and serum albumin.

Results:

One hundred and sixty-nine patients with mPC were eligible. Survival of patients with Score 0 (GPS/mGPS) was better than that of Score 1 (GPS/mGPS) or Score 2 (GPS/mGPS), which was statistically significant (P < 0.001). Of 78 patients who died, only 16 patients belonged to Score 0 (GPS/mGPS), compared to 30 patients belonged to Score 1 (GPS/mGPS) and 32 patients belonged to Score 2 (GPS/mGPS). Univariate analysis showed that high GPS/mGPS (P < 0.000) as well as poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (P < 0.000) and metastasis either to the liver (P < 0.01) or lung (P < 0.04) were linked with worse prognosis. A statistically significant association was detected between the two scores. Cohen’s Kappa coefficient (k) was 0.9, SD = 0.03; 95% CI (0.787–0.922; P < 0.001).

Conclusion:

Our data suggested that GPS/mGPS is an easy and applicable index that may be used in daily practice and may help in the prognostic stratification of mPC patients to avert overtreatment in frail patients and raise the best supportive treatment concept.

MM-associated circular RNA downregulates microRNA-19a through methylation to suppress proliferation of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cells

Opposite roles of circular RNA MM-associated circular RNA (circ-MYBL2) have been observed in different malignancies, and its role in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is unknown. Our preliminary sequencing data revealed its inverse correlation with microRNA-19a (miR-19a). This study was performed to explore the role of circ-MYBL2 in PA and its crosstalk with miR-19a. The accumulation of circ-MYBL2 and miR-19a in PA was detected by RT-qPCR. Participation of circ-MYBL2 in the regulation of miR-19a and its RNA gene methylation was studied with an overexpression assay, followed by RT-qPCR and MSP analyses. The role of miR-19a and circ-MYBL2 in PA cell proliferation and movement was evaluated using the BrdU assay and the Transwell assay, respectively. Downregulation of circ-MYBL2 and upregulation of miR-19a were observed in PA. In PA cells, circ-MYBL2 decreased the accumulation of miR-19a but increased its RNA gene methylation. Overexpression of circ-MYBL2 decreased PA cell proliferation and movement, while overexpression of miR-19a showed an opposite effect. In addition, circ-MYBL2 suppressed the role of miR-19a in cell proliferation, migration, and invasion. In conclusion, circ-MYBL2 was downregulated in PA and it downregulated miR-19a through methylation to suppress PA cell proliferation.

Outcomes of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who progress on first restaging imaging

Background

Objective responses to first-line systemic chemotherapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer patients are seen in less than one third of cases. Unfortunately, a significant amount will have disease progression (PD) on their first restaging imaging. With patients' short life expectancy, it is crucial for clinicians to be prudent when deciding whom and when to treat. Our study aimed to evaluate outcomes of patients that progressed on their first restaging imaging on 1^st line therapy.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients diagnosed between 2010-2017 whose first restaging imaging demonstrated PD. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from metastatic diagnosis date to death. Patients who were lost to follow-up were excluded.

Results

Out of 262 total patients reviewed, 98 patients (37%) were included. Sixty-five (66%) received 2^nd line therapy, and 33 (34%) did not. Reasons patients did not pursue 2^nd line therapy were performance status (PS) decline, organ dysfunction, or patient choice for alternative therapy. Median ages for patients who did and did not receive 2^nd line therapy were 61 and 67, respectively (P<0.001). More patients had a poor PS at the time of initial diagnosis in the non-2^nd line therapy group (7.5% vs. 31.0%, P=0.021). Median OS for those receiving 2^nd line therapy was 9 months (95% CI: 7-11 months) compared to 4 months (95% CI: 3-5 months) for those not receiving 2nd-line therapy (P<0.001).

Conclusions

Although likely biased due to better performance status and younger age, our patients who progressed rapidly on 1^st line therapy showed an OS benefit if they received 2^nd line therapy. These results suggest that patients maintaining a good PS after immediate progression on 1^st line therapy should be offered 2^nd line therapy.

The clinical outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a retrospective analysis

Background

Despite recent advances in first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer, standard treatment after the failure of initial chemotherapy has not been established. Hence, we aimed to retrospectively analyze the clinical characteristics and outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

Methods

We reviewed the clinical data of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who underwent palliative chemotherapy at Kosin University Gospel Hospital between January 2013 and October 2020.

Results

Among 366 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had received palliative chemotherapy, 104 (28.4%) underwent at least one cycle of second-line chemotherapy. The median age of the patients at the time of initiating second-line treatment was 62 years (interquartile range, 57–62 years), and 58.7% (61 patients) of them were male. The common second-line chemotherapy regimens were 5-fluorouracil (FU) plus leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (33 patients, 31.7%); gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (29, 27.9%), gemcitabine±erlotinib (13, 12.5%); and oxaliplatin and 5-FU/leucovorin (12, 11.5%). The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival were 6.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.5–8.6 months) and 4.5 months (95% CI, 2.7–6.3 months), respectively. In a multivariate analysis, poor performance status (PS) (hazard ratio [HR], 2.247; p=0.021), metastatic disease (HR, 2.745; p=0.011), and elevated carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels (HR, 1.939; p=0.030) at the beginning of second-line chemotherapy were associated with poor OS.

Conclusion

The survival outcome of second-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer remains poor. However, PS, disease extent (locally advanced or metastatic), and CEA level may help determine patients who could benefit from second-line treatment.

A Neoantigen-Based Peptide Vaccine for Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Refractory to Standard Treatment

Background

Neoantigens are critical targets to elicit robust antitumor T-cell responses. Personalized cancer vaccines developed based on neoantigens have shown promising results by prolonging cancer patients' overall survival (OS) for several cancer types. However, the safety and efficacy of these vaccine modalities remains unclear in pancreatic cancer patients.

Methods

This retrospective study enrolled 7 advanced pancreatic cancer patients. Up to 20 neoantigen peptides per patient identified by our in-house pipeline iNeo-Suite were selected, manufactured and administered to these patients with low tumor mutation burden (TMB) (less than 10 mutations/Mb). Each patient received multiple doses of vaccine depending on the progression of the disease. Peripheral blood samples of each patient were collected pre- and post-vaccination for the analysis of the immunogenicity of iNeo-Vac-P01 through ELISpot assay and flow cytometry.

Results

No severe vaccine-related adverse effects were witnessed in patients enrolled in this study. The mean OS, OS associated with vaccine treatment and progression free survival (PFS) were reported to be 24.1, 8.3 and 3.1 months, respectively. Higher peripheral IFN-γ titer and CD4⁺ or CD8⁺ effector memory T cells count post vaccination were found in patients with relatively long overall survival. Remarkably, for patient P01 who had a 21-month OS associated with vaccine treatment, the abundance of antigen-specific TCR clone drastically increased from 0% to nearly 100%, indicating the potential of iNeo-Vac-P01 in inducing the activation of a specific subset of T cells to kill cancer cells.

Conclusions

Neoantigen identification and selection were successfully applied to advanced pancreatic cancer patients with low TMB. As one of the earliest studies that addressed an issue in treating pancreatic cancer with personalized vaccines, it has been demonstrated that iNeo-Vac-P01, a personalized neoantigen-based peptide vaccine, could improve the currently limited clinical efficacy of pancreatic cancer.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier (NCT03645148).Registered August 24, 2018 - Retrospectively registered.

First- and Second-Line Palliative Systemic Treatment Outcomes in a Real-World Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Cohort

BACKGROUND

Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is characterized by a poor survival rate, which can be improved by systemic treatment. Consensus on the most optimal first- and second-line palliative systemic treatment is lacking. The aim of this study was to describe the use of first- and second-line systemic treatment, overall survival (OS), and time to failure (TTF) of first- and second-line treatment in metastatic PDAC in a real-world setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with synchronous metastatic PDAC diagnosed between 2015 and 2018 who received systemic treatment were selected from the nationwide Netherlands Cancer Registry. OS and TTF were evaluated using Kaplan-Meier curves with log-rank test and multivariable Cox proportional hazard analyses.

RESULTS

The majority of 1,586 included patients received FOLFIRINOX (65%), followed by gemcitabine (18%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (13%) in the first line. Median OS for first-line FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, and gemcitabine monotherapy was 6.6, 4.7, and 2.9 months, respectively. Compared to FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel showed significantly inferior OS after adjustment for confounders (hazard ratio [HR], 1.20; 95% CI, 1.02-1.41), and gemcitabine monotherapy was independently associated with a shorter OS and TTF (HR, 1.98; 95% CI, 1.71-2.30 and HR, 2.31; 95% CI, 1.88-2.83, respectively). Of the 121 patients who received second-line systemic treatment, 33% received gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel, followed by gemcitabine (31%) and FOLFIRINOX (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on population-based data in patients with metastatic PDAC, treatment predominantly consists of FOLFIRINOX in the first line and gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel in the second line. FOLFIRINOX in the first line shows superior OS compared with gemcitabine with or without nab-paclitaxel.

SOURCE-PANC: A Prediction Model for Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Based on Nationwide Population-Based Data

BACKGROUND

A prediction model for overall survival (OS) in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) including patient and treatment characteristics is currently not available, but it could be valuable for supporting clinicians in patient communication about expectations and prognosis. We aimed to develop a prediction model for OS in metastatic PDAC, called SOURCE-PANC, based on nationwide population-based data.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on patients diagnosed with synchronous metastatic PDAC in 2015 through 2018 were retrieved from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. A multivariate Cox regression model was created to predict OS for various treatment strategies. Available patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were used to compose the model. Treatment strategies were categorized as systemic treatment (subdivided into FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, and gemcitabine monotherapy), biliary drainage, and best supportive care only. Validation was performed according to a temporal internal-external cross-validation scheme. The predictive quality was assessed with the C-index and calibration.

RESULTS

Data for 4,739 patients were included in the model. Sixteen predictors were included: age, sex, performance status, laboratory values (albumin, bilirubin, CA19-9, lactate dehydrogenase), clinical tumor and nodal stage, tumor sublocation, presence of distant lymph node metastases, liver or peritoneal metastases, number of metastatic sites, and treatment strategy. The model demonstrated a C-index of 0.72 in the internal-external cross-validation and showed good calibration, with the intercept and slope 95% confidence intervals including the ideal values of 0 and 1, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A population-based prediction model for OS was developed for patients with metastatic PDAC and showed good performance. The predictors that were included in the model comprised both baseline patient and tumor characteristics and type of treatment. SOURCE-PANC will be incorporated in an electronic decision support tool to support shared decision-making in clinical practice.

Prognostic factors in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients-receiving second-line treatment: a single institution experience

BACKGROUND

Second-line (2L) treatments for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) achieve a modest benefit at the expense of potential toxicity. In the absence of predictive factors of response, the identification of prognostic factors could help in the therapeutic decisions-making. The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic factors associated with shorter survival in patients with advanced PDAC who received 2L treatment.

METHODS

We conducted a single institution retrospective study, which included all patients with advanced PDAC who received 2L treatment between September 2006 and February 2020 at La Paz University Hospital, Madrid (Spain). Significant variables in the logistic regression model were used to create a prognostic score.

RESULTS

We included 108 patients. The median overall survival (OS) was 5.10 months (95%CI 4.02-6.17). In the multivariate analysis, time to progression (TTP) shorter than 4 months after first-line treatment (OR 4.53 [95%CI 1.28-16.00] p = 0.01), neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) greater than 3 at the beginning of 2L (OR 9.07 [95%CI 1.82-45.16] p = 0.01) and CA-19.9 level higher than the upper limit of normal at the beginning of 2L (OR 7.83 [95%CI 1.30-49.97] p = 0.02) were independently associated with OS shorter than 3 months. The prognostic score classified patients into three prognostic groups (good, intermediate and poor) with significant differences in OS (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

TTP shorter than 4 months after first-line treatment, NLR greater than 3 and CA-19.9 level higher than the upper limit of normal at the beginning of 2L were associated with shorter overall survival. We developed a prognostic score that classifies patients with advanced PDAC into three prognostic groups after progression to the first-line. This score could help in the decision-making for 2L treatment.

Circulating Plasma Cells as a Biomarker to Predict Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Prognosis: Developing Nomogram Prognostic Models

Background: To investigate the prognostic value of circulating plasma cells (CPC) and establish novel nomograms to predict individual progression-free survival (PFS) as well as overall survival (OS) of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM).

Methods: One hundred ninetyone NDMM patients in Wuhan Union Hospital from 2017.10 to 2020.8 were included in the study. The entire cohort was randomly divided into a training (n = 130) and a validation cohort (n = 61). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on the training cohort to establish nomograms for the prediction of survival outcomes, and the nomograms were validated by calibration curves.

Results: When the cut-off value was 0.038%, CPC could well distinguish patients with higher tumor burden and lower response rates (P < 0.05), and could be used as an independent predictor of PFS and OS. Nomograms predicting PFS and OS were developed according to CPC, lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) and creatinine. The C-index and the area under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) of the nomograms showed excellent individually predictive effects in training cohort, validation cohort or entire cohort. Patients with total points of the nomograms ≤ 60.7 for PFS and 75.8 for OS could be defined as low-risk group and the remaining as high-risk group. The 2-year PFS and OS rates of patients in low-risk group was significantly higher than those in high-risk group (p < 0.001).

Conclusions: CPC is an independent prognostic factor for NDMM patients. The proposed nomograms could provide individualized PFS and OS prediction and risk stratification.

Exploring the significance of novel immune-related gene signatures in the prognosis and immune features of pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Immune-related genes (IRGs) are associated with the prognosis of different cancers and are helpful for the diagnosis and management of systematic treatment for cancer patients. However, there have been a few corresponding studies in pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAAD).

METHODS

The data of PAAD patients were obtained from the TCGA, GEO, and ICGC databases. Additionally, the expression profiles of the normal pancreas from the GTEx database were used to screen differentially expressed immune-related genes (DEIRGs). Cox regression analyses were used to explore overall survival (OS)- and progression-free survival (PFS)-related DEIRGs and to establish two nomograms for PAAD prognosis. Finally, transcription factor (TF), immune infiltration, and unsupervised consensus analyses were performed to understand the potential mechanisms.

RESULTS

An OS-prognostic signature based on seven DEIRGs and a PFS-prognostic signature based on seven DEIRGs were generated, and their robust prognostic ability was confirmed by ROC curves (OS: 0.736 ~ 0.774, PFS: 0.732 ~ 0.840). According to the risk score, the OS and PFS of the high-risk group were poorer than those of the low-risk group in the training set and four external validation sets. In addition, two nomograms based on the signatures and clinical variables also showed excellent discrimination. And two hub regulatory pathways were successfully validated in several independent datasets. Discernable patterns of DEIRGs in unsupervised consensus analysis showed that patients with low expression of immune checkpoints had a favorable prognosis.

CONCLUSION

Two DEIRG-based signatures can be used as independent tools for the prognostic prediction of PAAD and to provide potential novel immunotherapy targets.

Development and validation of a prognostic nomogram to predict survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving second-line palliative chemotherapy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Given that a wide variation in tumor response rates and survival times suggests heterogeneity among the patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) who underwent second-line (L2) chemotherapy, it is a challenge in clinical practice to identify patients who will receive the most benefit from L2 treatment.

METHODS

We selected 183 APC patients who received L2 palliative chemotherapy between 2010 and 2016 from a medical center as the development cohort. A Cox proportional hazard model was used to identify the prognostic factors and construct the nomogram. An independent cohort of 166 patients from three other hospitals was selected for external validation.

RESULTS

The nomogram was based on eight independent prognostic factors from the multivariate Cox model: sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, reason for first-line treatment discontinuation, duration of first-line treatment, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, tumor stage, body mass index, and serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels at the beginning of L2 treatment. The model exhibited good discrimination ability, with a C-index of 0.733 (95% confidence interval, 0.681-0.785) and 0.724 (95% confidence interval, 0.661-0.787) in the development and validation cohorts, respectively. The calibration plots of the development and validation cohorts showed optimal agreement between model prediction and actual observation in predicting survival probability at 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed and externally validated a prognostic model that accurately predicts the survival outcome of APC patients before L2 palliative chemotherapy, which could assist in clinical decision-making, counseling for treatment, and most importantly, prognostic stratification of patients.

Modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy following gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel therapy in metastatic pancreatic cancer

Background

There is no established second-line treatment after failure of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of the modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) as a second-line therapy for MPC and to investigate prognostic factors for survival.

Methods

From 2015 to 2019, we retrospectively reviewed the medical records of consecutive patients receiving mFFX for MPC after failure of GnP therapy. Patients were treated every 2 weeks with mFFX (intravenous oxaliplatin 85 mg/m², intravenous irinotecan 150 mg/m², and continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m² for 46 h without bolus infusion).

Results

In total, 104 patients received mFFX. The median overall survival (OS) was 7.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2–9.8) and the progression-free survival (PFS) 3.9 months (95% CI 2.8–5.0). The objective response rate was 10.6% and the disease control rate 56.7%. The median relative dose intensities of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional 5-FU were 80.0% (range 21.5–100%), 77.2% (range 38.1–100%), and 85.9% (range 36.9–100%), respectively. Grade 3–4 toxicities were reported in 57 patients (54.8%), including neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, febrile neutropenia, and peripheral sensory neuropathy. Glasgow prognostic score and carcinoembryonic antigen level were independently associated with survival. Our prognostic model using these parameters could classify the patients into good (n = 38), intermediate (n = 47), and poor (n = 19) prognostic groups. The median OS and PFS time was 14.7 (95% CI 7.6–16.3) and 7.6 months (95% CI 4.1–10.5) for the good prognostic factors, 6.5 (95% CI 5.5–10.0) and 3.6 months (95% CI 2.7–4.8) for the intermediate prognostic factors and 5.0 (95% CI 2.9–6.6) and 1.7 months (95% CI 0.9–4.3) for the poor prognostic factors, respectively.

Conclusions

The mFFX showed to be a tolerable second-line treatment for MPC after GnP failure. Our prognostic model might be useful for deciding whether mFFX is indicated in this setting.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer

Background

There are no randomized data to guide treatment decisions for patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma following first-line FOLFIRINOX. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies using gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX to assess treatment efficacy and toxicity.

Methods

We included studies published between 2011 and 2018 that evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy after FOLFIRINOX in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. We searched PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science. Primary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), any grade 3/4 toxicity rate, and progression-free survival (PFS). We used the random-effects model to generate pooled estimates for proportions.

Results

Sixteen studies met the eligibility criteria. Overall, ORR was 10.8%, DCR was 41.1%, and any grade 3/4 toxicity rate was 28.6%. In subgroup analyses, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with superior ORR (14.4 versus 8.4%; p = 0.038) and DCR (53.5 versus 30.5%; p < 0.001) compared with single-agent gemcitabine. Median PFS ranged from 1.9 to 6.4 months and numerically favored gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel.

Conclusions

Our study suggests gemcitabine-based chemotherapy likely outperforms best supportive care after FOLFIRINOX in advanced pancreatic cancer. Also, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel seems to be more active than single-agent gemcitabine (CRD42018100421).

Complete Radiologic Response of Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma to Microwave Ablation Combined with Second-Line Palliative Chemotherapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has a bleak prognosis, especially for the majority of patients diagnosed with metastatic disease. The primary option for palliative treatment is chemotherapy, and responses beyond first-line treatment are rare and typically short. Here, we report a case of a 63-year-old woman with PDAC in the head of the pancreas who was initially successfully treated by pancreaticoduodenectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine. However, disease recurrence with liver and para-aortic lymph node metastases was detected only two months after the completion of adjuvant chemotherapy. First-line palliative chemotherapy with gemcitabine-nab/paclitaxel was commenced. The results were discouraging, with disease progression (liver and lung metastases) detected at the first evaluation; the progression-free survival was just two months (64 days). Surprisingly, the response to second-line palliative chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil-oxaliplatin was excellent; in combination with the ablation of a liver metastasis, this treatment regimen resulted in a complete radiological response and an 11-month treatment-free interval with a sustained good performance status.

Analysis of Clinical Predictive Factors Affecting the Outcome of Second-Line Chemotherapy for Gemcitabine-Refractory Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Background/Aims: The benefit of second-line chemotherapy (SL) after failed first-line chemotherapy (FL) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer has not yet been established. We evaluated the clinical characteristics affecting the benefits of SL compared to best supportive care (BSC), identified the prognostic factors, and ultimately devised a model of clinical parameters to assist in making decision between SL and BSC after the failure of gemcitabine-based FL. Methods: The records of patients who received gemcitabinebased FL for advanced pancreatic cancer at Yonsei University Hospital between January 2010 and December 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Significant clinical parameters were assessed for their potential as predictive factors. Results: SL patients received a longer duration of FL compared with BSC patients with median duration being 16.0 weeks (range, 8.0 to 26.0 weeks) and 8.0 weeks (range, 4.0 to 16.0 weeks), respectively (p<0.001). When the SL group was stratified by their modified overall survival (mOS) (longer and shorter than 6 months), we found significant differences for several clinical factors, namely, metastasis to the peritoneum (p<0.001), number of metastases (p<0.001), thrombotic events (p=0.003), and level of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19- 9; p=0.011). In multivariate analysis, more than one site of metastasis, occurrence of thrombotic event during FL, and a CA19-9 level above 90 U/mL were significant independent prognostic factors for mOS in the SL group (p<0.05). When an attempt was made to devise a prognostic nomogram, Harrell's C-index of the final prognosis prediction model was 0.62. Conclusions: SL may be beneficial for patients without peritoneal metastasis or thrombotic events who have a single metastasis and a level of CA19-9 less than 90 U/mL. This prognostic nomogram can be used to predict mOS before the administration of SL after the failure of gemcitabinebased FL.

External validation of the Besançon nomogram in Asian patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving second-line chemotherapy: A multi-institute experience in Taiwan

BACKGROUND

Determining survival outcome in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC) patients receiving second-line (L2) chemotherapy is important for clinical decision-making. The Besançon group from France recently proposed a prognostic nomogram to predict overall survival (OS) for aPDAC patients receiving L2 chemotherapy. The present study aimed to externally validate the performance of the Besançon nomogram in predicting OS in an Asian cohort.

METHODS

We retrospectively enrolled 349 patients who received L2 chemotherapy for aPDAC between 2010 and 2016 at four institutes in Taiwan. The performance of the Besançon model in this cohort was evaluated with C-index and calibration plots.

RESULTS

The median OS time in our patient cohort was 4.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.0-5.0). Using the Besançon nomogram-predicted risk groups, the median OS times in the low, intermediate, and high-risk groups were 6.7 (95% CI, 5.3-8.2), 3.2 (95% CI, 2.4-3.9), and 1.7 months (95% CI, 0.6-2.7), respectively. The C-index of the predicted six- and 12-month survival probabilities for the Besançon nomogram were 0.766 (95% CI, 0.715-0.816) and 0.698 (95% CI, 0.641-0.754), respectively. The calibration plot showed that the observed six-month survival probability was close to the diagonal line, while that for 12-month survival deviated below the diagonal line compared to the survival probability predicted by the Besançon nomogram.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the Besançon nomogram tended to over-estimate the 12-month survival probability, our study demonstrated that the nomogram is a reliable and readily applicable model to estimate survival outcomes of aPDAC patients receiving L2 chemotherapy.

Outcomes and Characteristics of Patients Receiving Second-line Therapy for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

There is limited randomized data to guide second-line chemotherapy selection in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). We aimed to characterize predictors and outcomes of second-line chemotherapy in patients with APC.

METHODS

We identified all patients with APC [locally advanced (LAPC) or metastatic (MPC)] who received ≥1 cycle of first-line chemotherapy between January 2012 and December 2015 across 6 cancer centers in British Columbia, Canada. Baseline characteristics and survival outcomes were summarized.

RESULTS

Of 676 patients with APC (31% LAPC, 69% MPC) who received ≥1 cycle of chemotherapy, 164 (24%) received second-line chemotherapy. These patients were younger, with lower ECOG and higher CA19-9 at presentation, compared with patients who did not receive second-line chemotherapy. There were no differences in rates of second-line chemotherapy between LAPC and MPC (28% vs. 23%; P=0.18). Only first-line FOLFIRINOX was associated with second-line chemotherapy. Median overall survival (OS) from second-line chemotherapy was longer with second-line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel than fluoropyrimidine or gemcitabine (7.9 vs. 5.1 vs. 4.3 mo; P=0.008). On multivariable analysis, longer OS from second-line chemotherapy was associated with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, lower ECOG, and LAPC.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based cohort, first-line FOLFIRINOX was the strongest predictor of second-line chemotherapy. Duration of therapy remains short and novel treatments are urgently needed.

Validated Nomogram Predicting 6-Month Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients Receiving First-Line 5-Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, and Irinotecan

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is an option for fit patients with metastatic (MPC) and locally advanced unresectable (LAPC) pancreatic cancer. However, no criteria reliably identify patients with better outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We investigated putative prognostic factors among 137 MPC/LAPC patients treated with triplet chemotherapy. Association with 6-month survival status (primary endpoint) was assessed by multivariate logistic regression models. A nomogram predicting the risk of death at 6 months was built by assigning a numeric score to each identified variable, weighted on its level of association with survival. External validation was performed in an independent data set of 206 patients. The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03590275).

RESULTS

Four variables (performance status, liver metastases, baseline carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio) were found to be associated with 6-month survival by multivariate analysis or had sufficient clinical plausibility to be included in the nomogram. Accuracy was confirmed in the validation cohort (C index = 0.762; 95% confidence interval, 0.713-0.825). After grouping all cases, 4 subsets with different outcomes were identified by 0, 1, 2, or > 2 poor prognostic features (P < .0001).

CONCLUSION

The nomogram we constructed accurately predicts the risk of death in the first 6 months after initiation of FOLFIRINOX in MPC/LAPC patients. This tool could be useful to guide communication about prognosis, and to inform the design and interpretation of clinical trials.

Estimating the decision curve and its precision from three study designs

The decision curve plots the net benefit ( N B ) of a risk model for making decisions over a range of risk thresholds, corresponding to different ratios of misclassification costs. We discuss three methods to estimate the decision curve, together with corresponding methods of inference and methods to compare two risk models at a given risk threshold. One method uses risks (R) and a binary event indicator (Y) on the entire validation cohort. This method makes no assumptions on how well-calibrated the risk model is nor on the incidence of disease in the population and is comparatively robust to model miscalibration. If one assumes that the model is well-calibrated, one can compute a much more precise estimate of N B based on risks R alone. However, if the risk model is miscalibrated, serious bias can result. Case-control data can also be used to estimate N B if the incidence (or prevalence) of the event ( Y = 1 ) is known. This strategy has comparable efficiency to using the full ( R , Y ) data, and its efficiency is only modestly less than that for the full ( R , Y ) data if the incidence is estimated from the mean of Y. We estimate variances using influence functions and propose a bootstrap procedure to obtain simultaneous confidence bands around the decision curve for a range of thresholds. The influence function approach to estimate variances can also be applied to cohorts derived from complex survey samples instead of simple random samples.

Nomogram for Predicting Survival in Patients Treated with Liposomal Irinotecan Plus Fluorouracil and Leucovorin in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

NAPOLI-1 (NCT01494506) was a phase III study of liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapy. This post hoc analysis of NAPOLI-1 aimed to develop a predictive nomogram for overall survival (OS) at 6 and 12 months. Analyses were derived from all patients in NAPOLI-1 randomized to receive nal-IRI+5-FU/LV, nal-IRI monotherapy, or 5-FU/LV combination therapy. OS was associated with baseline factors using univariate and multivariable Cox analyses. A predictive nomogram was derived and validated using a concordance index and calibration plots. The univariate analyses identified 21 independent factors that contributed to OS, with eight factors significantly associated with OS. The Karnofsky Performance Score contributed the largest number of points (100), followed by presence of liver metastasis (98) and randomization to nal-IRI+5-FU/LV (96). The other baseline factors showing effects were albumin (g/dL), neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (U/mL), disease stage at diagnosis, and body mass index (kg/m²). The nomogram was used to predict the 6- and 12-month survival probability. The mean absolute errors between the observed and predicted probabilities for OS at 3, 6, and 9 months were 0.07, 0.08, and 0.07, respectively. This nomogram, based on NAPOLI-1, provides additional insight to aid decision-making for patients with mPDAC after previous gemcitabine-based therapy.

Association of time interval between cancer diagnosis and initiation of palliative chemotherapy with overall survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Palliative chemotherapy is the standard treatment for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Whether the early initiation of palliative chemotherapy is associated with a favorable survival outcome for these patients is not known. This study aimed to analyze the association of the time interval between cancer diagnosis and initiation of palliative chemotherapy with survival outcome in patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHOD

A total of 838 patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent palliative chemotherapy from 2010 to 2016 at 4 institutions in Taiwan were retrospectively enrolled. All patients were categorized according to time interval between cancer diagnosis and initiation of palliative chemotherapy for comparison of the survival outcome.

RESULT

The median time interval was 14 days (range, 0 to 163 days) in our patient cohort. Accordingly, 22%, 29%, and 49% of the patients underwent palliative chemotherapy within 1, 1 to 2, and >2 weeks after cancer diagnosis, respectively. The survival outcome had no statistical difference among these 3 patient groups. Subgroup analyses revealed that patients with the time interval ≤2 weeks exhibited poorer survival outcome than those with the time interval >2 weeks if they initially presented with jaundice (6.1 months vs 8.4 months, P = 0.029). In contrast, patients with the time interval ≤2 weeks revealed a better survival outcome than those with the time interval >2 weeks if they initially presented with pain (8.0 vs 6.3 months, P = 0.014).

CONCLUSION

In our study, time interval between cancer diagnosis and the initiation of palliative chemotherapy >2 weeks was not associated with a poorer survival outcome for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. Our result might help clinicians to clarify that early initiation of palliative chemotherapy might provide survival benefit for patients who present with tumor pain, but not for those who present with jaundice.

Prediction of survival with second-line therapy in biliary tract cancer: Actualisation of the AGEO CT2BIL cohort and European multicentre validations

BACKGROUND

The benefit of second-line chemotherapy (L2) over standard first-line (L1) gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GEMCIS) or oxaliplatin (GEMOX) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer (aBTC) is unclear. Our aim was to identify and validate prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) with L2 in aBTC to guide clinical decisions in this setting.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of four prospective patient cohorts: a development cohort (28 French centres) and three validation cohorts from Italy, UK and France. All consecutive patients with aBTC receiving L2 after GEMCIS/GEMOX L1 between 2003 and 2016 were included. The association of clinicobiological data with OS was investigated in univariate and multivariate Cox analyses. A simple score was derived from the multivariate model.

RESULTS

The development cohort included 405 patients treated with L1 GEMOX (91%) or GEMCIS. Of them, 55.3% were men, and median age was 64.8 years. Prior surgical resection was observed in 26.7%, and 94.8% had metastatic disease. Performance status (PS) was 0, 1 and 2 in 17.8%, 52.4% and 29.7%, respectively. Among 22 clinical parameters, eight were associated with OS in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, four were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.05): PS, reason for L1 discontinuation, prior resection of primary tumour and peritoneal carcinomatosis. The model had the Harrell's concordance index of 0.655, a good calibration and was validated in the three external cohorts (N = 392).

CONCLUSION

We validated previously reported predictive factors of OS with L2 and identified peritoneal carcinomatosis as a new pejorative factor in nearly 800 patients. Our model and score may be useful in daily practice and for future clinical trial design.

Retrospective analysis of efficacy and safety of Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma experiencing disease progression on FOLFIRINOX

Background

Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA) represents a highly lethal condition. Despite the improvements seen with FOLFIRINOX, there is no randomized data to guide treatment selection beyond this regimen. We aimed to evaluate the outcomes of patients with MPA progressing on FOLFIRINOX who were treated with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy afterwards.

Methods

We included patients aged 18 years or older, treated for MPA with FOLFIRINOX in the first-line setting and who experienced disease progression, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2, and treated with at least one cycle of Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in second or further lines of treatment. We used descriptive statistics to characterize the study population and Cox proportional-hazards models to describe factors associated with survival. As an exploratory analysis, we compared the outcomes of patients treated with single-agent Gemcitabine with those of patients undergoing Gemcitabine-based polychemotherapy.

Results

The study population consisted of 42 patients. Median age was 59 years and 78.6% of patients presented ECOG 0-1. Thirty-three patients (78.6%) were treated with Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy in the second-line setting and 27 patients (64.3%) were treated with single-agent Gemcitabine. Objective response rate and disease control rate were 2.4% and 33.4%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and median overall survival (OS) were 2.9 and 5.5 months, respectively. Six-month PFS and OS rates were 19.2% and 46.2%, respectively. We observed no significant difference in OS according to the type of Gemcitabine-based chemotherapy, despite numerically improved disease control rate and PFS for those treated with Gemcitabine-based polychemotherapy. In multivariate analysis, ECOG 2 (vs. ECOG 0-1) was the only factor significantly associated with inferior PFS and OS.

Conclusions

a subgroup of patients with MPA derives benefit from treatment with Gemcitabine-based regimens after FOLFIRINOX. There is a suggestion that Gemcitabine-based combinations, in particular Gemcitabine plus Nab-Paclitaxel, provide superior outcomes compared to single-agent Gemcitabine. Additionally, treatment in this setting should be offered carefully to patients with ECOG 2, as they present shorter survival and increased risk of toxicity.

Current status and dilemma of second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: is there a silver lining?

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal malignant diseases worldwide. The majority of patients present with advanced disease and, therefore, need palliative chemotherapy. Some chemotherapeutic regimens have been well established as first-line therapies and have been shown to increase survival; however, almost all patients with advanced pancreatic cancer will experience disease progression after first-line therapy. Nevertheless, many patients who retain good performance status after initial treatment remain good candidates for additional therapy. Historically, few studies have assessed second-line therapy, with most reports representing small phase II trials with variable findings; however, clinical research for second-line treatment has increased in the past decade, and several randomized controlled trials using different regimens have been published. The current literature shows varying results on treatment efficacy and tolerability. Thus, we reviewed the published data on the use of chemotherapy in the second-line setting for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Post-progression survival following second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer previously treated with gemcitabine: a meta-analysis

Background Post-progression survival (PPS) could be a confounding element in interpreting data from clinical trials of second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) previously treated with gemcitabine (GEM) because a recent meta-analysis of oxaliplatin combination therapy showed statistical heterogeneity for overall survival (OS) but not for progression-free survival (PFS). This study aimed to improve the understanding of the impact of PPS on OS in this setting. Methods Databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in the salvage setting. We evaluated relationships between OS and PFS, PPS, and other variables. Results Totally, 17 RCTs with 3253 patients were identified. Median OS was strongly and moderately associated with median PPS and PFS, respectively (r = 0.913; p < 0.001 and 0.780; p < 0.001, respectively). The proportion of patients with good performance status was significantly associated with both PPS and PFS (r = 0.574, p < 0.001 and 0.492, p < 0.001, respectively). The induction rate of subsequent chemotherapy was related to the duration of PPS and OS (r = 0.640, p < 0.001 and 0.647, p < 0.001, respectively). Median PPS and OS were significantly longer in recent trials than those in older trials (3.55 versus 2.78 months, p < 0.001 and 6.29 versus 5.02 months, p < 0.001). Conclusions Median PPS was strongly correlated with median OS. Given the recently increased opportunity for subsequent chemotherapy and supportive care, PPS may serve as an important element to clarify problems in this setting.