Nab-Paclitaxel Plus S-1 Shows Increased Antitumor Activity in Patient-Derived Pancreatic Cancer Xenograft Mouse Models

Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a multicenter, randomized, phase II study

BACKGROUND

Encouraging antitumor activity of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (AS) has been shown in several small-scale studies. This study compared the efficacy and safety of AS versus standard-of-care nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (AG) as a first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

In this multicenter, randomized, phase II trial, eligible patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic PC were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive AS (nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8; S-1 twice daily on days 1 through 14) or AG (nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8; gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8) for 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Between July 16, 2019, and September 9, 2022, 62 patients (AS, n = 32; AG, n = 30) were treated and evaluated. With a median follow-up of 8.36 months at preplanned interim analysis (data cutoff, March 24, 2023), the median PFS (8.48 vs 4.47 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.402; P = .002) and overall survival (OS; 13.73 vs 9.59 months; HR, 0.226; P < .001) in the AS group were significantly longer compared to the AG group. More patients had objective response in the AS group than AG group (37.50% vs 6.67%; P = .005). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia and leucopenia in both groups, and gamma glutamyl transferase increase was observed only in the AG group.

CONCLUSION

The first-line AS regimen significantly extended both PFS and OS of Chinese patients with advanced PC when compared with the AG regimen, with a comparable safety profile. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03636308).

Efficacy of nab‑paclitaxel vs. Gemcitabine in combination with S‑1 for advanced pancreatic cancer: A multicenter phase II randomized trial

Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) need a cost-effective treatment regimen. The present study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (AS) and gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) regimens in patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced PC. In this open-label, multicenter, randomized study named AvGmPC, eligible patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced PC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive AS (125 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel, days 1 and 8; 80-120 mg S-1, days 1-14) or GS (1,000 mg/m2 gemcitabine, days 1 and 8; 80-120 mg S-1, days 1-14). The treatment was administered every 3 weeks until intolerable toxicity or disease progression occurred. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Between December 2018 and March 2022, 101 of 106 randomized patients were treated and evaluated for analysis (AS, n=49; GS, n=52). As of the data cutoff, the median follow-up time was 11.37 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 9.31-13.24]. The median PFS was 7.16 months (95% CI, 5.19-12.32) for patients treated with AS and 6.41 months (95% CI, 3.72-8.84) for patients treated with GS (HR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.51-1.21; P=0.264). The AS regimen showed a slightly improved overall survival (OS; 13.27 vs. 10.64 months) and a significantly improved ORR (44.90 vs. 15.38%; P=0.001) compared with the GS regimen. In the subgroup analyses, PFS and OS benefits were observed in patients treated with the AS regimen who had KRAS gene mutations and high C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (≥5 mg/l). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia, anemia and alopecia in the two groups. Thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently in the GS group than in the AS group. While the study did not meet the primary endpoint, the response benefit observed for AS may be suggestive of meaningful clinical activity in this population. In particular, promising survival benefits were observed in the subsets of patients with KRAS gene mutations and high CRP levels, which is encouraging and warrants further investigation. This trial was retrospectively registered as ChiCTR1900024588 on July 18, 2019.

Hemorrhagic cystitis in gastric cancer after nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel: A case report

BACKGROUND

The advanced first-line regimen for advanced gastric cancer is based on a combination of fluoropyrimidine and platinum and/or paclitaxel (PTX), forming a two- or three-drug regimen. Compared to conventional PTX, nanoparticle albumin-bound PTX (Nab-PTX) has better therapeutic effects and fewer adverse effects reported in studies. Nab-PTX is a great option for patients presenting with advanced gastric cancer. Herein, we highlight an adverse event (hemorrhagic cystitis) of Nab-PTX in advanced gastric cancer.

CASE SUMMARY

A 55-year-old male was diagnosed with lymph node metastasis after a laparoscopic-assisted radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer that was treated by Nab-PTX and S-1 (AS). On the 15th day after treatment with AS, he was diagnosed with hemorrhagic cystitis.

CONCLUSION

Physicians should be aware that hemorrhagic cystitis is a potential adverse event associated with Nab-PTX treatment.

Paclitaxel and its semi-synthetic derivatives: comprehensive insights into chemical structure, mechanisms of action, and anticancer properties

Cancer is a disease that can cause abnormal cell growth and can spread throughout the body. It is among the most significant causes of death worldwide, resulting in approx. 10 million deaths annually. Many synthetic anticancer drugs are available, but they often come with side effects and can interact negatively with other medications. Additionally, many chemotherapy drugs used for cancer treatment can develop resistance and harm normal cells, leading to dose-limiting side effects. As a result, finding effective cancer treatments and developing new drugs remains a significant challenge. However, plants are a potent source of natural products with the potential for cancer treatment. These biologically active compounds may be the basis for enhanced or less toxic derivatives. Herbal medicines/phytomedicines, or plant-based drugs, are becoming more popular in treating complicated diseases like cancer due to their effectiveness and are a particularly attractive option due to their affordability, availability, and lack of serious side effects. They have broad applicability and therapeutic efficacy, which has spurred scientific research into their potential as anticancer agents. This review focuses on Paclitaxel (PTX), a plant-based drug derived from Taxus sp., and its ability to treat specific tumors. PTX and its derivatives are effective against various cancer cell lines. Researchers can use this detailed information to develop effective and affordable treatments for cancer.

Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 versus oxaliplatin plus S-1 as first-line treatment in advanced gastric cancer: results of a multicenter, randomized, phase III trial (GAPSO study)

Background:

This study aimed to investigate the superiority of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (AS) over oxaliplatin plus S-1 (SOX) in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC).

Methods:

In this multicenter, randomized, phase III superiority trial, eligible patients with unresectable, locally advanced gastric adenocarcinoma were recruited and randomly assigned (1:1) to receive AS (nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m² on day 1 or 130 mg/m² on days 1 and 8; oral S-1 40–60 mg twice daily for 14 days) or SOX (130 mg/m² oxaliplatin on day 1; oral S-1 40–60 mg twice daily for 14 days) every 3 weeks for up to six cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response rate, and safety.

Results:

Owing to slow enrolment, an unplanned interim analysis was performed, resulting in the early termination of the study on 31 December 2021 (data cutoff). Between March 2019 and March 2021, 97 patients (AS, n = 48; SOX, n = 49) were treated and evaluated for efficacy and safety of AS and SOX. As of the data cutoff, the median follow-up was 23.13 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 13.39–32.87]. The median PFS was 9.03 months (95% CI, 6.50–11.56) in the AS group and 5.07 months (95% CI, 4.33–5.81) in the SOX group, demonstrating a better PFS tendency following AS treatment than SOX treatment (hazard ratio = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37–0.94; p = 0.03). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were anemia, neutropenia, and leukopenia in both groups, with a higher incidence of thrombocytopenia in the SOX group.

Conclusion:

Although this study was terminated early, the results demonstrated a better PFS tendency in patients with AGC who were treated with AS than in those treated with SOX, with controllable toxicities.

Trial registration:

Clinical Trials.gov identifiers: NCT03801668. Registered January 11, 2019.

Phase I study of adjuvant chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel and S-1 for stage III Lauren's diffuse-type gastric cancer after D2 resection (NORDICA study)

PURPOSE

The prognosis of diffuse-type gastric cancer (DGC) is poorer than that of intestinal type, but S-1 is a potential treatment option in DGC. This study explored the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended dose for phase II study (RP2D) of nab-paclitaxel combined with S-1 (AS regimen) as adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III DGC.

METHODS

Patients with stage III DGC were recruited into this phase I dose-escalation study between July 2019 and June 2020 in Zhongshan Hospital. Nab-paclitaxel and S-1 (80-120 mg/day, d1-14, q3w) were administrated for 6 cycles, and then 8 cycles of S-1 monotherapy were applied. The patients received nab-paclitaxel at 180, 220, or 260 mg/m² according to the 3 + 3 design based on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). The primary endpoint was RP2D. Secondary endpoints were the 1-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

One case experienced DLT in 180-mg/m² dose group, subsequently three additional subjects were enrolled. DLT was not observed in the 220- and 260-mg/m² dose groups (both n = 3). Therefore, the MTD has not reached, and the RP2D of nab-paclitaxel would be 260 mg/m² . Five participants showed progressive disease, with three and two participants in the 180- and 220-mg/m² dose groups, respectively. The 6-, 12-, and 18-month DFS rates were 100%, 63.6%, and 50.9%, respectively. The most frequently observed AEs were neutropenia (83.3%) and leukopenia (66.7%).

CONCLUSION

The RP2D of nab-paclitaxel as adjuvant chemotherapy in DGC was 260 mg/m² . The AS regimen had a tolerable AE profile in stage III DGC.

Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a randomized study

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (nab-P/S) versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Treatment-naïve patients with advanced PDAC were equally randomized to receive nab-P/S or nab-P/G. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary endpoints were ORR of the primary lesion, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The trial was registered at https://clinicaltrials.gov as NCT03636308.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients were planned for enrollment, but the trial was prematurely closed because no better ORR was observed with nab-P/S among the first 40 patients assigned between 08/2018 and 06/2019. The ORR was numerically higher with nab-P/S versus nab-P/G (35.0% vs 25.0%, P = 0.49). The ORRs of the primary lesion for both arms were similar (30.0% and 25.0%, P = 0.72). Disease control rate was 70.0% in each arm. There was no significant difference in PFS and OS between the two arms (median PFS, 6.3 vs 5.7 months, P = 0.34; median OS, 10.2 vs 10.2 months, P = 0.92). Risks of hematological toxicity, liver injury and rash were significantly decreased in the nab-P/S arm.

CONCLUSIONS

A biweekly combination of nab-P/S yielded comparable efficacy with nab-P/G but improved safety profile. It may be a promising and convenient alternative as first-line and neoadjuvant settings for advanced PDAC.

Efficacy and Safety of Nab-Paclitaxel Plus S-1 versus Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine for First-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Objective

Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P/G) has been established as a standard first-line treatment in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). S-1, as an oral fluoropyrimidine derivative, demonstrated effective for PDAC. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of first-line chemotherapy with nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (nab-P/S) versus nab-P/G in patients with advanced PDAC.

Methods

Patients with advanced PDAC receiving nab-P/S (n = 65) or nab-P/G (n = 45) as first-line chemotherapy between November 2013 and June 2019 were reviewed.

Results

The objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate were numerically higher with nab-P/S than with nab-P/G (38.5% vs 28.9%, P = 0.30, 73.8% vs 66.7%, P = 0.42, respectively). ORRs of the primary lesion were similar for both groups (30.8% and 22.2%, P = 0.32). The median progression-free survival and overall survival were comparable between the two groups (5.5 vs 5.7 months, P = 0.34, 10.2 vs 11.3 months, P = 0.74, respectively). Nab-P/S was associated with a numerically lower risk of adverse events, especially hematologic adverse events.

Conclusion

Nab-P/S could be a convenient alternative with similar efficacy and a favorable safety profile compared with nab-P/G as first-line chemotherapy for advanced PDAC, as well as an option for neoadjuvant therapy.

Nab-paclitaxel interrupts cancer-stromal interaction through C-X-C motif chemokine 10-mediated interleukin-6 downregulation in vitro

Cancer‐associated fibroblasts (CAF), derived from stroma of cancer tissues, interact with cancer cells and play an important role in cancer initiation, growth, and metastasis. Nab‐paclitaxel (nab‐PTX) is a 130 nm albumin‐binding paclitaxel and recommended for many types of cancer chemotherapy. The nab‐PTX stromal‐disrupting effect during pancreatic cancer treatment has been reported. The aim of the present study was to determine the role of nab‐PTX in cancer cells and CAF interaction. Cancer cells (MIA PaCa‐2 and Panc‐1) were cocultured with CAF or treated with CAF conditioned medium, after which their migration and invasion ability, epithelial‐mesenchymal transition (EMT)‐related marker expression and C‐X‐C motif chemokine 10 (CXCL10) expression and secretion were detected. Nab‐PTX treatment was carried out during the coculture system or during preparation of CAF conditioned medium. Then cancer cell migration and invasion ability, EMT‐related marker expression, CXCL10 expression and secretion, and interleukin‐6 (IL‐6) expression and secretion by CAF were checked After coculture with CAF, migration and invasion ability of cancer cells increased. CAF also downregulated E‐cadherin and upregulated N‐cadherin and vimentin expression in cancer cells. During coculture or stimulation with cancer cell‐cultured medium, CAF significantly increased IL‐6 expression and secretion. However, nab‐PTX in the coculture system canceled CAF‐induced migration and invasion promotion and EMT‐related gene changes. Moreover, nab‐PTX increased CXCL10 expression of cancer cells which blocked CAF IL‐6 expression and secretion. Nab‐PTX treatment could increase CXCL10 expression of cancer cells which blocks CAF cancer cell migration and invasion‐promoting effect by inhibiting IL‐6 expression.

Efficacy and safety comparison of nabpaclitaxel plus S-1 and gemcitabine plus S-1 as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer

Objective

To compare efficacy and safety of nabpaclitaxel plus S-1 (AS) with gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) as first-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort, single-institution analysis by reviewing medical records of 38 patients who received either AS (nabpaclitaxel 125 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8 and S-1 80 mg/m2 on Days 1 to 14) or GS (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on Days 1, 8 and S-1 80 mg/m2 on Days 1 to 14) chemotherapy.

Results

AS was associated with a prolonged median time to progression (TTP; 7.1 months, 95% CI, 4.5-9.7 vs. 3.6 months, 95% CI, 1.8-5.4; P value = 0.022) and improved median overall survival (OS; 10.2 months, 95% CI, 9.1-11.3 vs. 6 months, 95% CI, 4.2-7.8; P value <0.001) compared with GS. In cox proportional hazards model, treatment regimen was the only variable to be significantly associated with improvements in both TTP and OS. Subgroup analyses based on HER2 expression showed that AS seemed to have better outcome of OS in HER2 positive patients (HR = 0.168; 95% CI, 0.022-1.27; P value = 0.084). Hematological adverse events were commonly seen in both group (12.5% and 22.7%, GS and AS group, Grade 3 or 4; P value = 0.675) while AS got increased risk of sensory neuropathy (6 of 22 patients in AS, 27.3% vs. 0 of 16 patients in GS, all grade; P value = 0.03).

Conclusions

AS could be an effective treatment regimen for metastatic pancreatic cancer under surveillance of toxicity.

Translational pancreatic cancer research: A comparative study on patient-derived xenograft models

AIM

To assess the viability of orthotopic and heterotopic patient-derived pancreatic cancer xenografts implanted into nude mice.

METHODS

This study presents a prospective experimental analytical follow-up of the development of tumours in mice upon implantation of human pancreatic adenocarcinoma samples. Specimens were obtained surgically from patients with a pathological diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Tumour samples from pancreatic cancer patients were transplanted into nude mice in three different locations (intraperitoneal, subcutaneous and pancreatic). Histological analysis (haematoxylin-eosin and Masson's trichrome staining) and immunohistochemical assessment of apoptosis (TUNEL), proliferation (Ki-67), angiogenesis (CD31) and fibrogenesis (α-SMA) were performed. When a tumour xenograft reached the target size, it was re-implanted in a new nude mouse. Three sequential tumour xenograft generations were generated (F1, F2 and F3).

RESULTS

The overall tumour engraftment rate was 61.1%. The subcutaneous model was most effective in terms of tissue growth (69.9%), followed by intraperitoneal (57.6%) and pancreatic (55%) models. Tumour development was faster in the subcutaneous model (17.7 ± 2.6 wk) compared with the pancreatic (23.1 ± 2.3 wk) and intraperitoneal (25.0 ± 2.7 wk) models (P = 0.064). There was a progressive increase in the tumour engraftment rate over successive generations for all three models (F1 28.1% vs F2 71.4% vs F3 80.9%, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in tumour xenograft differentiation and cell proliferation between human samples and the three experimental models among the sequential generations of tumour xenografts. However, a progressive decrease in fibrosis, fibrogenesis, tumour vascularisation and apoptosis was observed in the three experimental models compared with the human samples. All three pancreatic patient-derived xenograft models presented similar histological and immunohistochemical characteristics.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, the faster development and greatest number of viable xenografts could make the subcutaneous model the best option for experimentation in pancreatic cancer.

Thymidylate synthase prompts metastatic progression through the dTMP associated EMT process in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

As a fundamental metabolic enzyme, anti-Thymidylate synthase (TS) strategy has been shown to be an effective therapy for human cancers. However, the genuine effects of TS in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) are still conflicting. We systemically assessed the prognostic value and whether TS associated with malignant progression in PDA. Protein and mRNA expression level of TS were evaluated in en bloc PDA samples, the prognostic effect of TS expressed in cytoplasm or cytonuclear was determined separately in the first time. The impact of TS on tumor cell behaviors was assessed in in vitro assays, and the TS associated metastatic potential was further determined in two different PDA metastatic models. The retrospective clinical analysis firstly demonstrated that tumor cytonuclear TS expression was positively correlated with lymphatic metastasis and negatively correlated with the overall survival (OS) in PDA patients. The subsequent experiments further confirmed that TS depletion can effectively abate EMT (epithelial to mesenchymal) process in in vitro and decline most of the metastatic lesions in two different PDA mice models, and the deoxythymidine monophosphate (dTMP) biosynthesis malfunction resulted imbalanced dNTP pools may be the fundamental causation. Collectively, the present study suggested the prospective strategy of combined anti-TS scheme for metastatic PDA, and we strongly suggest further clinical standardization research with a large cohort to verify the prognostic value and the therapeutic potential of TS in PDA.

Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (NPSPAC): a single arm, single center, phase II trial

This single-arm, phase II trial is to investigate efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 as first-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer. Nab-paclitaxel was administered at 120 mg/m² intravenously on day 1 and 8, S-1 was given twice a day orally on day 1-14 of each 21-day cycle, for 6 cycles. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), the secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. The ORR in intent-to-treat population (N=60) by either blinded independent review (BIR) or investigator assessment was 50.0%. Median PFS (mPFS) by BIR and median OS (mOS) were 5.6 months (95%CI, 4.6 to 6.6 m) and 9.4 months (95%CI, 8.0 to 10.8m), respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicities were leukopenia/neutropenia (35%) and fatigue (8.3%). Subgroup analyses based on BIR showed a remarkable ORR (>70%) was achieved in patients with female gender, ≥ 50% decline from baseline CA19-9, and developed grade 3 or 4 leukopenia/neutropenia. Remarkable survival benefit was statistically significant in female (mPFS: 7.7m, mOS: 18.2m), ≥ 50% decline from baseline CA19-9 (mPFS: 6.8m, mOS: 11.8m), objective responders (mPFS: 6.9m, mOS: 12.2m), and ECOG of 0 at baseline (mPFS: 7.5m, mOS: 16.1m). Nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 showed encouraging ORR and manageable toxicities, which is an effective alternative treatment regimen for advanced pancreatic cancer. (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ number, NCT02124317)

Nano albumin bound-paclitaxel in pancreatic cancer: Current evidences and future directions

Pancreatic cancer (PDAC) is an aggressive and chemoresistant disease, representing the fourth cause of cancer related deaths in western countries. Majority of patients have unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic disease at time of diagnosis and the 5-year survival rate in these conditions is extremely low. For more than a decade gemcitabine has been the cornerstone of metastatic PDAC treatment, although survival benefit was very poor. PDAC cells are surrounded by an intense desmoplastic reaction that may create a barrier to the drugs penetration within the tumor. Recently PDAC stroma has been addressed as a potential therapeutic target. Nano albumin bound (Nab)-paclitaxel is an innovative molecule depleting tumor stroma, through interaction between albumin and secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine. Addition of nab-paclitaxel to gemcitabine has showed activity and efficacy in metastatic PDAC first-line treatment improving survival and overall response rate vs gemcitabine alone in the MPACT phase III study. This combination represents one of the standards of care in advanced PDAC therapy and is suitable to a broader spectrum of patients compared to other schedules. Nab-paclitaxel is under investigation as a backbone of chemotherapy in novel combinations with target agents or immunotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic PDAC. In this article, we provide an updated and critical overview about the role of nab-paclitaxel in PDAC treatment based on the latest advances in preclinical and clinical research. Furthermore, we focus on the use of nab-paclitaxel within the context of metastatic PDAC treatment landscape and we discuss about future implications in the light of current clinical ongoing trials.