Combination 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and cisplatin (LV5FU2-CDDP) followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised strategic phase III trial (FFCD 0301)

Efficacy of Cisplatin-Containing Chemotherapy Regimens in Patients of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The relative success of cisplatin-based chemotherapy regimens for PDAC in clinical trials warrants a review of the literature to assess the cumulative results. This study aims to assess the efficacy of cisplatin-containing regimens for PDAC in terms of survival and response outcomes using a systematic review and proportional meta-analysis.

METHODS

In this study, an electronic search was conducted on PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and Google Scholar to find relevant literature. The random effects model was used to assess pooled overall response rate, stable disease rate, progressive disease rate, 1-year overall survival rate, and their 95% CIs. Publication bias was assessed using funnel plot symmetry and the one-tailed Eggers' test. In all cases, p-value < 0.05 was indicative of significant results. The review is registered with PROSPERO: CRD42023459243.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies consisting of 1599 patients were included in this review. All the included studies were of good quality. In total, 906 patients were male, and the median age of the patients was 58-69 years. Overall, 599 patients had cancer of the pancreatic head, 139 had cancer of the pancreatic body, and 102 patients had cancer of the pancreatic tail. The pooled risk ratios (RRs) revealed an overall response rate of 19.2% (95% CI, 14.6-24.2%), a stable disease rate of 42.3% (95% CI, 36.6-48.8), a 1-year overall survival rate of 40% (95% CI, 34.3-45.8), and progressive disease rate of 24.7% (95% CI, 18.8-31.2). Commonly reported adverse events were anemia, thrombocytopenia, abdominal adverse events, neutropenia, fatigue, leukopenia, alopecia, anorexia, mucositis, stomatitis, and hepatobiliary adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Cisplatin-containing regimens have shown moderate efficacy with significant improvement in overall survival at 1 year, stable disease rate, and progressive disease rate; however, only a small percentage of patients achieved an overall response rate.

The Microbiome in Pancreatic Cancer-Implications for Diagnosis and Precision Bacteriophage Therapy for This Low Survival Disease

While the mortality rates for many cancers have decreased due to improved detection and treatments, that of pancreatic cancer remains stubbornly high. The microbiome is an important factor in the progression of many cancers. Greater understanding of the microbiome in pancreatic cancer patients, as well as its manipulation, may assist in diagnosis and treatment of this disease. In this report we reviewed studies that compared microbiome changes in pancreatic cancer patients and non-cancer patients. We then identified which bacterial genera were most increased in relative abundance across the oral, pancreatic, duodenal, and faecal tissue microbiomes. In light of these findings, we discuss the potential for utilising these bacteria as diagnostic biomarkers, as well as their potential control using precision targeting with bacteriophages, in instances where a causal oncogenic link is made.

5-epi-Sinuleptolide from Soft Corals of the Genus Sinularia Exerts Cytotoxic Effects on Pancreatic Cancer Cell Lines via the Inhibition of JAK2/STAT3, AKT, and ERK Activity

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is one of the most lethal malignancies: more than half of patients are diagnosed with a metastatic disease, which is associated with a five-year survival rate of only 3%. 5-epi-Sinuleptolide, a norditerpene isolated from Sinularia sp., has been demonstrated to possess cytotoxic activity against cancer cells. However, the cytotoxicity against pancreatic cancer cells and the related mechanisms are unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the anti-pancreatic cancer potential of 5-epi-sinuleptolide and to elucidate the underlying mechanisms. The inhibitory effects of 5-epi-sinuleptolide treatment on the proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells were determined and the results showed that 5-epi-sinuleptolide treatment inhibited cell proliferation, induced apoptosis and G2/M cell cycle arrest, and suppressed the invasion of pancreatic cancer cells. The results of western blotting further revealed that 5-epi-sinuleptolide could inhibit JAK2/STAT3, AKT, and ERK phosphorylation, which may account for the diverse cytotoxic effects of 5-epi-sinuleptolide. Taken together, our present investigation unveils a new therapeutic and anti-metastatic potential of 5-epi-sinuleptolide for pancreatic cancer treatment.

Systemic Therapy for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is mainly diagnosed at an advanced, often metastatic stage and still has a poor prognosis. Over the last decades, chemotherapy of metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPDAC) has proven to be superior to a mere supportive treatment with respect to both survival and quality of life. Recently, even sequential treatment of mPDAC could be established. Options for first-line treatment are combination chemotherapy regimens such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel when the performance status of the patient is good. For patients with poorer performance status, gemcitabine single-agent treatment is a valid option. Recently, the PARP inhibitor olaparib has been demonstrated to improve progression-free survival when used as a maintenance treatment in the subgroup of patients with mPDAC and a BRCA1/-2 germ line mutation having received at least 16 weeks of platinum-based chemotherapy. This group of patients also benefits from platinum-based chemotherapy combinations. Therefore, the BRCA1/-2 stats should be examined early in patients with mPDAC even when the occurrence of these mutations is only about 5% in the general Caucasian population. After the failure of first-line treatment, patients should be offered a second-line treatment if their ECOG permits further treatment. Here, the combination of 5-FU/FA plus nanoliposomal irinotecan has shown to be superior to 5-FU/FA alone with respect to overall survival. Immune checkpoint inhibitors like PD1/PD-L1 mAbs are particularly efficacious in tumors with high microsatellite instability (MSI-h). Limited data in mPDACs shows that only a part of the already small subgroup of MSI-H mPDACs (frequency about 1%) appears to benefit substantially from a checkpoint inhibitor treatment. The identification of further subgroups, e.g., tumors with DNA damage repair deficiency, gene fusions, as well as novel approaches such as tumor-organoid-informed treatment decisions, may further improve therapeutic efficacy.

Three fluoropyrimidine-based regimens in routine clinical practice after nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: An AGEO multicenter study

BACKGROUND

A combination of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (N+G) has recently become a standard first-line treatment in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA), but there are currently no published data concerning second-line treatment after N+G. The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival outcomes and tolerability of three usual fluoropyrimidine-based regimens FOLFOX, FOLFIRI and FOLFIRINOX after N+G failure in MPA patients.

METHODS

Patients receiving N+G as first-line regimen were prospectively identified in 11 French centers between January 2014 and January 2017. After disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, patients eligible for second-line therapy were enrolled in the study. The primary endpoint was overall survival following the second-line regimen. Secondary endpoints were objective response, progression-free survival and safety.

RESULTS

Out of 137 patients treated with N+G as first-line regimen, 61 (44.5%) received second-line chemotherapy, including FOLFOX (39.4%), FOLFIRI (34.4%) or FOLFIRINOX (26.2%). Baseline characteristics were not different between the 3 groups. In particular, median age was 71.7 years, sex ratio was 1/1, and performance status (PS) was 0 in 11.5% of case. Main grade 3 toxicities were neutropenia (4.9%) and nausea (3.3%), without major differences between the groups. No toxic death was observed. Median second-line progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 2.95 (95% CI: 2.3-5.4) and 5.97 months (95% CI: 4.0-8.0), respectively, with no difference between the 3 groups. Median OS from the start of first-line chemotherapy was 12.7 months (10.4-15.1) and was significantly better in patients receiving FOLFIRI after N+G failure, 18.4 months (95% CI: 11.7-24.1, P<0.05), as compared with FOLFOX or FOLFIRINOX (10.4 and 12.3 months, respectively).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that second-line fluoropyrimidine-based regimens after N+G failure are feasible, have a manageable toxicity profile in selected patients with MPA, and are associated with promising clinical outcomes, in particular when combined with irinotecan. Randomized phase 3 trials are needed to confirm this trend.

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.

Consensus statement on mandatory measurements in pancreatic cancer trials (COMM-PACT) for systemic treatment of unresectable disease

Variations in the reporting of potentially confounding variables in studies investigating systemic treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer pose challenges in drawing accurate comparisons between findings. In this Review, we establish the first international consensus on mandatory baseline and prognostic characteristics in future trials for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. We did a systematic literature search to find phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify baseline characteristics and prognostic variables. We created a structured overview showing the reporting frequencies of baseline characteristics and the prognostic relevance of identified variables. We used a modified Delphi panel of two rounds involving an international panel of 23 leading medical oncologists in the field of pancreatic cancer to develop a consensus on the various variables identified. In total, 39 randomised controlled trials that had data on 15 863 patients were included, of which 32 baseline characteristics and 26 prognostic characteristics were identified. After two consensus rounds, 23 baseline characteristics and 12 prognostic characteristics were designated as mandatory for future pancreatic cancer trials. The COnsensus statement on Mandatory Measurements in unresectable PAncreatic Cancer Trials (COMM-PACT) identifies a mandatory set of baseline and prognostic characteristics to allow adequate comparison of outcomes between pancreatic cancer studies.

Pancreatic cancer: French clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up (SNFGE, FFCD, GERCOR, UNICANCER, SFCD, SFED, SFRO, ACHBT, AFC)

BACKGROUND

This document is a summary of the French intergroup guidelines regarding the management of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA), updated in July 2018.

DESIGN

This collaborative work was produced under the auspices of all French medical and surgical societies involved in the management of PA. It is based on the previous guidelines, recent literature review and expert opinions. Recommendations were graded in three categories, according to the level of evidence.

RESULTS

Over the last seven years, significant changes in PA management have been implemented in clinical practice. Imaging/staging: diffusion magnetic resonance imaging is useful before surgery to rule out small liver metastases.

SURGERY

centralization of pancreatic surgery in expert centers is associated with a decreased postoperative mortality. Adjuvant chemotherapy: modified FOLFIRINOX in fit patients, or gemcitabine, or 5-FU, or gemcitabine plus capecitabine, to be discussed on a case-by-case basis. Locally advanced PA: no survival benefit of chemoradiotherapy. Metastatic PA: FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel combination are first-line standards in fit patients; second-line with 5FU/nal-IRI or 5FU/oxaliplatin combination after first-line gemcitabine.

CONCLUSION

Guidelines for management of PA are continuously evolving and need to be regularly updated. This constant progress is made possible through clinical and translational research. However, as each individual case is particular, they cannot substitute to multidisciplinary tumor board discussion.

Pancreatic cancer: challenges and opportunities

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States, with increasing incidence. The mortality rate of pancreatic cancer is rising rapidly, and is projected to be the second most common of all malignant tumors by 2030. However, the diagnosis and therapy of pancreatic cancer remain a formidable challenge. Recently, enormous efforts have been made to develop several new methods for the early diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer. We briefly introduce the most groundbreaking advances in pancreatic cancer diagnosis and clinical treatment strategies over the past 15 years, including surgery, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, immunotherapy and personalized medicine. The signaling pathways that are altered in the progression of pancreatic cancer, which may be used as therapeutic targets, are also discussed.

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.

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.

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.

High Dose Parenteral Ascorbate Inhibited Pancreatic Cancer Growth and Metastasis: Mechanisms and a Phase I/IIa study

Pancreatic cancer is among the most lethal cancers with poorly tolerated treatments. There is increasing interest in using high-dose intravenous ascorbate (IVC) in treating this disease partially because of its low toxicity. IVC bypasses bioavailability barriers of oral ingestion, provides pharmacological concentrations in tissues, and exhibits selective cytotoxic effects in cancer cells through peroxide formation. Here, we further revealed its anti-pancreatic cancer mechanisms and conducted a phase I/IIa study to investigate pharmacokinetic interaction between IVC and gemcitabine. Pharmacological ascorbate induced cell death in pancreatic cancer cells with diverse mutational backgrounds. Pharmacological ascorbate depleted cellular NAD+ preferentially in cancer cells versus normal cells, leading to depletion of ATP and robustly increased α-tubulin acetylation in cancer cells. While ATP depletion led to cell death, over-acetylated tubulin led to inhibition of motility and mitosis. Collagen was increased, and cancer cell epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) was inhibited, accompanied with inhibition in metastasis. IVC was safe in patients and showed the possibility to prolong patient survival. There was no interference to gemcitabine pharmacokinetics by IVC administration. Taken together, these data revealed a multi-targeting mechanism of pharmacological ascorbate's anti-cancer action, with minimal toxicity, and provided guidance to design larger definitive trials testing efficacy of IVC in treating advanced pancreatic cancer.

Gemcitabine as second-line chemotherapy after Folfirinox failure in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is diagnosed in most cases at an advanced stage requiring chemotherapy. Folfirinox is the standard first-line treatment. After Folfirinox failure, gemcitabine alone is routinely used as second-line therapy without data supporting this attitude.

AIM

Determine the response rate and outcome of patients with advanced PA treated with gemcitabine after Folfirinox failure.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients treated with gemcitabine after Folfirinox failure for a locally advanced or metastatic PA between 2009 and 2015. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Response rate, control rate and tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

96 patients were included (male, 51%; median age, 62; performance status (PS) 0-1, 47%). Median duration on gemcitabine was 2.1 months. The overall disease control rate was 40%. Median OS was 3.7 months (95%CI: 2.5-5.2) and median PFS was 2.1 months (95%CI: 2.0-2.6). Reasons for treatment discontinuation were mostly progression (51%). Age at diagnosis and PS were independently associated with OS in multivariate analysis (HR of 1.86; p=0.0055 and 2.42; p<0.0001 respectively). 34 patients experienced a grade 3 adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that gemcitabine is not beneficial to all patients failing on Folfirinox first-line therapy and should be restricted to young patients with good PS.

Effect of FOLFIRINOX as second-line chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy failure

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity, and efficacy of second-line chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX after gemcitabine (GEM)-based chemotherapy failure in metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC).

METHODS

We studied 18 histopathologically proven MPC patients. The schedule was 85 mg/m oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and 400 mg/m leucovorin, followed by 400 mg/m 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) as a bolus on day 1 and 2400 mg/m 5-FU as a 46-hour continuous infusion biweekly. The dose of irinotecan was defined as follows: level 0: 100 mg/m, level 1: 125 mg/m, level 2: 150 mg/m, and level 3: 180 mg/m. The doses of other drugs were fixed. The primary endpoint of phase II study was the response rate (RR).

RESULTS

We initially evaluated 6 patients in a phase I study. One patient developed neutropenia and 1 patient developed hyperglycemia and severe infection. Accordingly, level 1 was chosen as the MTD. According to a phase II study, the RR was 22.2% and the disease control rate was 61.1%. The progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.8 (range, 0.7-19.1) and 9.8 (2.4-19.8) months, respectively. The most common severe adverse event was neutropenia (66.7%). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 1 (5.6%) case.

CONCLUSION

The recommended dose was 85 mg/m oxaliplatin, 100 mg/m irinotecan, and 400 mg/m leucovorin, followed by 400 mg/m 5-FU as a bolus on day 1 and 2400 mg/m 5-FU as a 46-hour continuous infusion. These results indicate that second-line FOLFIRINOX is a marginally effective treatment for GEM-based chemotherapy failure cases.

Second-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: Which is the best option?

Despite recent biological insight and therapeutic advances, the prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer still remains poor. For more than 15 years, gemcitabine monotherapy has been the cornerstone of first-line treatment. Recently, prospective randomized trials have shown that novel upfront combination regimens tested in prospective randomized trials have resulted in improved patients' outcome increasing the proportion of putative candidate to second-line therapy. There is no definite standard of care after disease progression. A novel formulation in which irinotecan is encapsulated into liposomal-based nanoparticles may increase the efficacy of the drug without incrementing its toxicity. NAPOLI-1 was the first randomized trial to compare nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil-leucovorin (5-FU/LV) to 5-FU/LV alone after a gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. This review focuses on the current data for the management of second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, presents the most interesting ongoing clinical trials and illustrates the biologically-driven future options beyond disease progression.

Evaluation of gemcitabine efficacy after the FOLFIRINOX regimen in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

To evaluate gemcitabine efficacy in advanced pancreatic cancer patients after the FOLFIRINOX regimen.Patients with locally-advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma from French and Canadian centers, who were treated with the first-line FOLFIRINOX regimen (FFX L1), followed by gemcitabine monotherapy as a second-line treatment (GEM L2), were retrospectively evaluated. Statistical analyses were performed on the demographic, toxicity, and response rate data. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method.Seventy-two patients were reviewed (median age of 63.5 years [range, 32-75 years], men [62%], predominantly pancreatic head tumor location [51%] and metastatic disease [64%] at the time of diagnosis). The objective response rate to GEM-L2 treatment was 8/72 (11%), and 32 patients (44%) experienced a clinical benefit from gemcitabine. Four patients had a partial response to GEM-L2, although they previously showed a progressive response following FFX-L1 treatment. The median OS for the entire cohort was 13.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.0-35). The median PFS of the GEM-L2 group was 2.5 months (95% CI: 0.2-10.8) with no statistical differences between patients with controlled or progressive disease on FFX-L1 therapy.Gemcitabine as a second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma after FOLFIRINOX failure showed clinical benefits in some patients.

Designing a bio-inspired biomimetic in vitro system for the optimization of ex vivo studies of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive and lethal human malignancies. Drug therapies and radiotherapy are used for treatment as adjuvants to surgery, but outcomes remain disappointing. Advances in tissue engineering suggest that 3D cultures can reflect the in vivo tumor microenvironment and can guarantee a physiological distribution of oxygen, nutrients, and drugs, making them promising low-cost tools for therapy development. Here, we review crucial structural and environmental elements that should be considered for an accurate design of an ex vivo platform for studies of pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, we propose environmental stress response biomarkers as platform readouts for the efficient control and further prediction of the pancreatic cancer response to the environmental and treatment input.

Targeting Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition for Identification of Inhibitors for Pancreatic Cancer Cell Invasion and Tumor Spheres Formation

Background

Pancreatic cancer has an enrichment of stem-like cancer cells (CSCs) that contribute to chemoresistant tumors prone to metastasis and recurrence. Drug screening assays based on cytotoxicity cannot identify specific CSC inhibitors, because CSCs comprise only a small portion of cancer cell population, and it is difficult to propagate stable CSC populations in vitro for high-throughput screening (HTS) assays. Based on the important role of cancer cell epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in promoting CSCs, we hypothesized that inhibition of EMT can be a useful strategy for inhibiting CSCs, and therefore a feasible approach for HTS can be built for identification of CSC inhibitors, based on assays detecting EMT inhibition.

Methods

An immunofluorescent assay was established and optimized for HTS to identify compounds that enhance E-cadherin expression, as a hallmark of inhibition of EMT. Four chemical libraries containing 41,472 compounds were screened in PANC-1 pancreatic cancer cell line. Positive hits were validated for EMT and CSC inhibition in vitro using sphere formation assay, western blotting, immune fluorescence, and scratch assay.

Results

Initial hits were refined to 73 compounds with a secondary screening, among which 17 exhibited concentration dependent induction of E-cadherin expression. Six compounds were selected for further study which belonged to 2 different chemical structural clusters. A novel compound 1-(benzylsulfonyl) indoline (BSI, Compound #38) significantly inhibited pancreatic cancer cell migration and invasion. BSI inhibited histone deacetylase, increased histone 4 acetylation preferably, resulting in E-cadherin up-regulation. BSI effectively inhibited tumor spheres formation. Six more analogues of BSI were tested for anti-migration and anti-CSC activities.

Conclusion

This study demonstrated a feasible approach for discovery of agents targeting EMT and CSCs using HTS, and identified a class of novel chemicals that could be developed as anti-EMT and anti-CSC drug leads.

Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncologists and others for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, gastroenterology, palliative care, and advocacy experts to conduct a systematic review of the literature from April 2004 to June 2015. Outcomes were overall survival, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-four randomized controlled trials met the systematic review criteria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A multiphase computed tomography scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be performed. Baseline performance status and comorbidity profile should be evaluated. Goals of care, patient preferences, treatment response, psychological status, support systems, and symptom burden should guide decisions for treatments. A palliative care referral should occur at first visit. FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin; favorable comorbidity profile) or gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound (NAB) -paclitaxel (adequate comorbidity profile) should be offered to patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0 to 1 based on patient preference and support system available. Gemcitabine alone is recommended for patients with ECOG PS 2 or with a comorbidity profile that precludes other regimens; the addition of capecitabine or erlotinib may be offered. Patients with an ECOG PS ≥ 3 and poorly controlled comorbid conditions should be offered cancer-directed therapy only on a case-by-case basis; supportive care should be emphasized. For second-line therapy, gemcitabine plus NAB-paclitaxel should be offered to patients with first-line treatment with FOLFIRINOX, an ECOG PS 0 to 1, and a favorable comorbidity profile; fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin, irinotecan, or nanoliposomal irinotecan should be offered to patients with first-line treatment with gemcitabine plus NAB-paclitaxel, ECOG PS 0 to 1, and favorable comorbidity profile, and gemcitabine or fluorouracil should be offered to patients with either an ECOG PS 2 or a comorbidity profile that precludes other regimens. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/guidelines/MetPC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

Improved survival after palliative resection of unsuspected stage IV pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Palliative resection of stage IV pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has not shown its benefit until now. In our retrospective review, we compared the results of palliative resection to non-resection.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2009, metastasis of PDAC was confirmed in the operating room in 150 patients. 35 underwent palliative resection (resection group; R) and 115 did bypass or biopsy. 35 patients (biopsy or bypass group: NR) in the 115 patients were matched with the patients undergoing resection for tumor size and the metastasis of peritoneal seeding. Demographic, clinical, operative data and survival were analyzed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference of major complication (Clavien-Dindo classification 3-5) between two groups. There was no 30-day mortality in either group. More patients in R received postoperative chemotherapy (82.9% vs. 57.1%; P = 0.019). Multivariate analysis showed resection and postoperative chemotherapy as independent factor related to survival (hazard ratio, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.25-0.76; P = 0.003). Patients in R showed better survival rates compared to those in NR (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests resection for stage IV PDAC can be associated with increased survival. In patients of stage IV PDAC, palliative resection with chemotherapy could have some benefit in selected patients.

Dual targeting of HER1/EGFR and HER2 with cetuximab and trastuzumab in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine failure: results of the "THERAPY"phase 1-2 trial

To improve treatment efficacy, we decided to simultaneously target HER1 and HER2 with trastuzumab and cetuximab. Following promising preclinical results, we conducted a phase 1-2 trial in advanced pancreatic cancer patients after first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy failure. In this single-arm, non-randomized, multicenter trial, patients received weekly cetuximab (400mg/m², then 250mg/m²). They were sequentially included in two trastuzumab dose levels: 3.0 or 4.0mg/kg, then 1.5 or 2.0mg/kg/weekly. Endpoints were the objective response rate, safety, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). During phase 1 (n=10 patients), toxicities were evenly distributed except for skin toxicities that frequently caused compliance issues. The higher dose level was defined as the trastuzumab recommended dose. During phase 2 (n=39 patients), toxicities were mainly cutaneous reactions and asthenia. No objective response was observed. Nine patients were stabilized but arrested treatment due to toxicity. Median PFS was 1.8 months (95%CI: 1.7-2.0 months) and median OS was 4.6 months (95%CI: 2.7–6.6 months). Both were positively correlated with skin toxicity severity (P=0.027 and P=0.001, respectively). Conventional phase 1 dose-escalation schedules are unsuitable for targeted therapies because most cutaneous toxicities are not considered dose-limiting toxicities. The compliance issues caused by skin toxicities were particularly detrimental because of the toxicity-response correlation.

Treatment of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma in Elderly Patients over 75 Years of Age: A Retrospective Series of 129 Patients

PURPOSE

To better know the presentation and outcome of pancreatic adenocarcinoma in patients above 75 years of age.

METHOD

Retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with a pancreatic adenocarcinoma seen in the Comprehensive Cancer Center of Marseille between January 2002 and January 2012 was used.

RESULTS

During these 10 years, 129 patients older than 75 years of age were seen, 61 females and 68 males, median age 78. At diagnosis, the tumor was metastatic in 45%. First line treatments were: surgical resection in 22 cases, radio-chemotherapy in 20 cases (1 operated on later), systemic chemotherapy in 59 cases, and best supportive care alone in 28 cases. Resection was possible in 19 cases and was R0 in 17; post-operative mortality was 0%, and half received adjuvant chemotherapy. Median overall survival was 43 months with a 2-year overall survival of 64%. For locally advanced tumor, 16 received best supportive care and 33 a specific treatment (20 cases of radio-chemotherapy). Median overall survival was 9.1 months and 2-year overall, survival was 6.1%. Among the 58 metastatic patients, 79% received systemic chemotherapy (most by gemcitabine); tolerance was correct in half. Median overall survival was 4.7 months, with a 2-year overall survival of 5.3%.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgery of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is feasible and safe in elderly patients with good outcomes. In advanced and metastatic patients, the outcome is poor despite a correct tolerance of systemic chemotherapy. Randomized trials specially designed for this population are urgently needed.

Does chemotherapy improve health-related quality of life in advanced pancreatic cancer? A systematic review

Chemotherapy is increasingly being used in advanced pancreatic cancer, but side-effects are common. The aim of this systematic review was to assess whether chemotherapy improves health-related quality of life (HRQoL), pain or cachexia. Thirty studies were reviewed. Four of 23 studies evaluating HRQoL, 7 of 24 studies evaluating pain and 0 of 8 studies evaluating cachexia found differences between treatment arms. Change in HRQoL from baseline was evaluated in 14 studies: five studies reported an improvement in at least one treatment arm; three a worsening and the remaining stable scores. Change in pain intensity from baseline was evaluated in eight studies, and improvement was observed in seven. Of the four studies reporting improved survival, three reported improved HRQoL or pain. In conclusion, chemotherapy can stabilize HRQoL and improve pain control. Effects on cachexia are hard to elucidate. Improved survival does not come at the expense of HRQoL or pain control.

Regression of Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer to Curative Surgery and Introduction of a Novel Ex-Vivo Chemosensitivity Assay

Although data suggests little hope for survival when patients present with metastatic pancreatic cancer, recent advances in systemic therapy offer the possibility for dramatic tumor responses like those observed in other disease sites. Here, we present the case of a 50-year-old woman who presented with adenocarcinoma of the pancreas with two liver metastases and a CA 19-9 level of 1,659 U/mL. The patient received FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) with a dramatic reduction in CA 19-9 level to 23.9 U/mL, and complete regression of both liver metastases. The patient then received capecitabine with the maintenance of a normal CA19-9 over the next 12 months. With no evidence of distant disease, concurrent systemic and local therapy with capecitabine-based chemoradiation (CapeXRT) was performed followed by observation for eight months with normal CA 19-9 readings. A mild increase in CA 19-9 (143 U/mL) prompted a restaging demonstrating an active primary tumor but no distant disease. Therefore, a pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD or Whipple) was performed rendering this patient free of detectable cancer.

Our team has developed an ex-vivo chemosensitivity assay in which the tumor tissue from an individual patient can be rapidly examined for sensitivity to available systemic therapy treatment strategies. We tested this patient’s tumor for its sensitivity to gemcitabine (Gem) versus a combination of 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FIRINOX). Remarkably, our assay confirmed a profound sensitivity of this patient’s tumor to the agents she had received.

Second-line treatment in inoperable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and synthesis of all clinical trials

There remains uncertainty regarding the optimal second-line chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The current recommendation of 5-fluorouracil and oxaliplatin may not be relevant in current practice, as FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin) has become a more popular first line therapy in fit patients. The majority of studies in this setting are single-arm Phase II trials with significant heterogeneity of patient populations, treatments and outcomes. In this review, we sought to systematically review and synthesise all prospective data available for the second-line treatment of advanced PDAC.

Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for advanced pancreatic cancer after first-line FOLFIRINOX: single institution retrospective review of efficacy and toxicity

Background

We conducted a retrospective review of the dose, toxicity, and efficacy of second line gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (G + Nab-P) after FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we included all patients with locally advanced unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer who were treated at Yale Cancer Center with G + Nab-P between 12/2011 and 12/2013 after receiving first line FOLFIRINOX. For each patient, demographics, prior therapy, doses of G + Nab-P (cumulative doses and dose intensity relative to full dose G + Nab-P), hematologic toxicities, best response by RECIST, time to treatment failure (TTF), and survival were compiled. Median TTF and overall survival (OS) were calculated by Kaplan–Meier method.

Results

28 patients were treated with G + Nab-P after first line FOLFIRINOX. The median TTF was 12.0 weeks (range 2.0–36.0), and the median OS was 23.0 weeks (range 2.1–85.4). Five patients had a partial response (response rate 17.9 %), and 28.6 % of patients had stable disease for ≥7 weeks. A decline in CA 19-9 and CEA by >30 % was observed in 13 (46.4 %) and 11 (39.3 %) patients, respectively. The median relative dose intensities were 62.4 and 57.5 % for G and Nab-P, respectively. Grade ≥3 hematologic toxicities included neutropenia in 17.9 %, anemia in 25.0 %, and thrombocytopenia in 25.0 % of patients.

Conclusions

Second line G + Nab-P following FOLFIRINOX is feasible, and demonstrated modest activity and clinical benefit in advanced pancreatic cancer. The optimum sequencing and dosing of these active regimens warrants further evaluation in prospective trials.

A randomized phase II study of weekly nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine or simplified LV5FU2 as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: the AFUGEM GERCOR trial

BACKGROUND

Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) prognosis remains dismal and gemcitabine monotherapy has been the standard treatment over the last decade. Currently, two first-line regimens are used in this setting: FOLFIRINOX and nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. Increasing translational data on the predictive value of hENT1 for determining gemcitabine efficacy suggest that a non-gemcitabine-based regimen is favored in about 60 % of patients with PAC due to high resistance of PAC to this cytotoxic drug. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of weekly nab-paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine or a simplified (s) LV5FU2 regimen in patients with previously untreated metastatic PAC.

METHODS/DESIGN

AFUGEM is a two-stage, open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase II trial. Patients with PAC who meet the inclusion criteria and provide written informed consent will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio to either nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2)) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) given on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days or nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2)) plus sLV5FU2 (leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) followed by bolus 400 mg/m(2) 5-fluorouracil and by 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m(2) as an 46-h intravenous infusion) given on days 1 and 15 every 28 days. A total of 114 patients will be randomized to one of the treatment arms. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival at 4 months. Secondary outcomes are rate and duration of response, disease control, overall survival, safety, and quality of life. Potential biomarkers of gemcitabine (hENT1, dCK) and 5-fluorouracil (TS) efficacy will be assessed.

DISCUSSION

The AFUGEM trial is designed to provide valuable information regarding efficacy and tolerability of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel plus sLV5FU2 regimens. Identification of potential predictive biomarkers of gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil is likely to drive therapeutic decisions in patients with metastatic PAC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

AFUGEM is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01964534 , October 15, 2013.

Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after Folfirinox failure: an AGEO prospective multicentre cohort

BACKGROUND

There is currently no standard second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA), and progression-free survival is consistently <4 months in this setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (A+G) after Folfirinox failure in MPA.

METHODS

From February 2013 to July 2014, all consecutive patients treated with A+G for histologically proven MPA after Folfirinox failure were prospectively enrolled in 12 French centres. A+G was delivered as described in the MPACT trial, until disease progression, patient refusal or unacceptable toxicity.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients were treated with Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, for a median of 4 cycles (range 1-12). The disease control rate was 58%, with a 17.5% objective response rate. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.8 months (95% CI: 6.2-9.7) and median progression-free survival was 5.1 months (95% CI: 3.2-6.2). Since the start of first-line chemotherapy, median OS was 18 months (95% CI: 16-21). No toxic deaths occurred. Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 40% of patients, consisting of neutropenia (12.5%), neurotoxicity (12.5%), asthenia (9%) and thrombocytopenia (6.5%).

CONCLUSIONS

A+G seems to be effective, with a manageable toxicity profile, after Folfirinox failure in patients with MPA.

State of the art and future directions of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma therapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is expected to become the second cause of cancer-related death in 2030. PDAC is the poorest prognostic tumor of the digestive tract, with 80% of patients having advanced disease at diagnosis and 5-year survival rate not exceeding 7%. Until 2010, gemcitabine was the only validated therapy for advanced PDAC with a modest improvement in median overall survival as compared to best supportive care (5-6 vs 3 months). Multiple phase II-III studies have used various combinations of gemcitabine with other cytotoxics or targeted agents, most in vain, in attempt to improve this outcome. Over the past few years, the landscape of PDAC management has undergone major and rapid changes with the approval of the FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel regimens in patients with metastatic disease. These two active combination chemotherapy options yield an improved median overall survival (11.1 vs 8.5 months, respectively) thus making longer survival a reasonably achievable goal. This breakthrough raises some new clinical questions about the management of PDAC. Moreover, better knowledge of the environmental and genetic events that underpin multistep carcinogenesis and of the microenvironment surrounding cancer cells in PDAC has open new perspectives and therapeutic opportunities. In this new dynamic context of deep transformation in basic research and clinical management aspects of the disease, we gathered updated preclinical and clinical data in a multifaceted review encompassing the lessons learned from the past, the yet unanswered questions, and the most promising research priorities to be addressed for the next 5 years.

Progression-free survival as surrogate endpoint in advanced pancreatic cancer: meta-analysis of 30 randomized first-line trials

BACKGROUND

Progression-free survival (PFS) has not been extensively investigated as a surrogate for survival in the first-line treatments of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this review was to evaluate PFS as a potential surrogate endpoint for overall survival (OS) in advanced pancreatic cancer in trials comparing poly-chemotherapy to gemcitabine alone.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic literature search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted. The key words included randomized trial, first-line chemotherapy, pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine and poly-chemotherapy. Adjusted weighted linear regression was used to calculate RS (Spearman's rank-order correlation coefficient) between PFS and post-progression survival (PPS) with OS (RS) and between treatment effects on PFS and OS (RHR).

RESULTS

A total of 30 trials including 8467 patients met the inclusion criteria. Correlation between the treatment effects on PFS and OS (RHR=0.78) and between the endpoint PFS and OS was high across all studies (RS=0.75). The slope of the regression line was 0.76+/-0.26, indicating that an agent producing a 10% risk reduction for PFS will provide a 7.6%+/-2.6% risk reduction for OS. Correlation between PPS and OS was very strong (RS=0.71) and accounted for more than 50% of the whole OS variability (R2=0.57).

CONCLUSION

Because of the robust correlation with OS and the potential influence of PPS caused by the second line therapies, it may be justified to consider PFS as a surrogate endpoint in trials evaluating new cytotoxic agents when gemcitabine is the control arm.

Addressing the challenges of pancreatic cancer: future directions for improving outcomes

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which accounts for more than 90% of all pancreatic tumours, is a devastating malignancy with an extremely poor prognosis, as shown by a 1-year survival rate of around 18% for all stages of the disease. The low survival rates associated with PDAC primarily reflect the fact that tumours progress rapidly with few specific symptoms and are thus at an advanced stage at diagnosis in most patients. As a result, there is an urgent need to develop accurate markers of pre-invasive pancreatic neoplasms in order to facilitate prediction of cancer risk and to help diagnose the disease at an earlier stage. However, screening for early diagnosis of prostate cancer remains challenging and identifying a highly accurate, low-cost screening test for early PDAC for use in clinical practice remains an important unmet need. More effective therapies are also crucial in PDAC, since progress in identifying novel therapies has been hampered by the genetic complexity of the disease and treatment remains a major challenge. Presently, the greatest step towards improved treatment efficacy has been made in the field of palliative chemotherapy by introducing FOLFIRINOX (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Strategies designed to raise the profile of PDAC in research and clinical practice are a further requirement in order to ensure the best treatment for patients. This article proposes a number of approaches that may help to accelerate progress in treating patients with PDAC, which, in turn, may be expected to improve the quality of life and survival for those suffering from this devastating disease.

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.

Systemic treatment for inoperable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: review and update

There have been many clinical trials conducted to evaluate novel systemic regimens for unresectable pancreatic cancer. However, most of the trial results were negative, and gemcitabine monotherapy has remained the standard systemic treatment for years. A number of molecular targeted agents, including those against epidermal growth factor receptor and vascular endothelial growth factor receptors, have also been tested. In recent years, there have been some breakthroughs in the deadlock: three regimens, namely gemcitabine-erlotinib, FOLFIRINOX, and gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel, have been shown to prolong the overall survival of patients when compared with gemcitabine monotherapy. In addition, emerging data suggested that the membrane protein human equilibrative nucleotide transporter 1 is a potential biomarker with which to predict the efficacy of gemcitabine. Here we review the literature on the development of systemic agents for pancreatic cancer, discuss the current choices of treatment, and provide future directions on the development of novel agents.

Polychemotherapy or gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine monotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. To date, no clear survival benefit has been found when combination chemotherapy has been compared with gemcitabine alone, except in a few studies. This meta-analysis compared the efficacy of polychemotherapy with gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Randomised trials comparing combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine alone were identified through electronic searches of PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Overall survival, reported as the hazard ratio at the 95% confidence interval, was the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

29 trials (19 phase III and 10 small randomised trials) that included 8421 patients were identified. Overall, polychemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (hazard ratio=0.87; 95% CI, 0.81-0.93; P<0.0001), progression-free survival (hazard ratio=0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.84; P<0.00001), and response rate (risk ratio=1.71; 95% CI, 1.42-2.07; P<0.00001) compared with gemcitabine alone.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with gemcitabine monotherapy, combinations of two or more drugs (particularly those with novel agents or associated with >20% response rates and triplets) improved outcomes and response rate in advanced pancreatic cancer, and they could be considered a new standard of care in advanced settings.

Antitumor Activities of Rauwolfia vomitoria Extract and Potentiation of Gemcitabine Effects Against Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal malignancies with very limited treatment option. In the effort of enhancing the effect of the conventional chemotherapeutic drug gemcitabine against pancreatic cancer, we investigated in vitro and in vivo the anticancer effect of a β-carboline-enriched extract from the plant Rauwolfia vomitoria (Rau), either alone or in combination with gemcitabine, in preclinical pancreatic cancer models. Rau induced apoptosis in pancreatic cancer cells in a concentration-dependent manner, and completely inhibited colony formation of PANC-1 cells in soft agar. The combination of Rau and gemcitabine had synergistic effect in inhibiting cell growth with dose reduction effect for gemcitabine. In an orthotopic pancreatic cancer mouse model, PANC-1 tumor growth was significantly suppressed by Rau treatment. Metastasis was inhibited by Rau. Adding Rau to gemcitabine treatment reduced tumor burden and metastatic potential in the gemcitabine non-responsive tumor. These data suggest that Rau possesses anti–pancreatic cancer activity and could improve effect of gemcitabine.

Sustained response with gemcitabine plus Nab-paclitaxel after folfirinox failure in metastatic pancreatic cancer: report of an effective new strategy

INTRODUCTION

Folfirinox has shown a benefit in terms of survival and quality of life in first line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. However, efficacy of second line chemotherapy after folfirinox is still limited. Gemcitabine plus Nab-paclitaxel have been recently validated as first line treatment with an increased overall survival compared to gemcitabine. This combination has never been studied as second-line after folfirinox.

CASE REPORT

A metastatic pancreatic cancer was diagnosed in a 60-year-old patient with a performance status of 0. After 10 cycles of folfirinox, and an initial objective response, we objectively noted progressive disease according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria together with an increased carbohydrate antigen 19-9. The multidisciplinary team decided to use gemcitabine plus Nab-paclitaxel as second line palliative chemotherapy. After 2 months, we obtained an objective response. After 6 months, this response was maintained with an acceptable tolerability.

CONCLUSION

Gemcitabine plus Nab-paclitaxel, as second line palliative chemotherapy, after failure of folfirinox, could be a good strategy for patients with a performance status of 0 and 1. Obviously, this data has to be confirmed in larger patients series and in future comparative clinical studies.

Cisplatin-modified de Gramont in second-line therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

In Belgium, combination chemotherapy of cisplatin and 5-fluorouracil + leucovorin (CFL) according to the modified de Gramont schedule is the treatment of choice in second line for metastatic pancreatic cancer. We retrospectively analyzed survival data in 2 Belgian centers in a nonselected population.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and October 2011, 48 patients with histologically proven recurrent or unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma who had received CFL as second-line treatment were identified. We retrospectively analyzed the following parameters: progression-free survival (PFS1 and PFS2) for each line (after the start of first and second line), overall survival (OS), and growth modulation index.

RESULTS

The median PFS1 was 5.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 4.1-6.6). The median PFS2 was 3.6 months (95% CI, 2-5.2). The median OS was 12 months (95% CI, 9.3-14.7). Twenty-three percent of patients had a growth modulation index >1.33.

CONCLUSION

We show an OS of 12 months with gemcitabine in first-line and CFL in second-line therapy for pancreatic cancer. Sequential therapy with good OS and good quality of life may be preferred to strong upfront therapy in an incurable disease such as pancreatic cancer.

Second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: a comprehensive analysis of published clinical trials

BACKGROUND

There is currently no standard of care for the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. The aim of this analysis was to compare the different therapeutic approaches in this setting.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic analysis of second-line studies in advanced pancreatic cancer that have progressed on or following gemcitabine and published or presented from 2000 to 2012.

RESULTS

Forty-four clinical trials (t) were identified; of which 34 met the inclusion criteria treating an aggregate total of 1503 patients (n). Patients who received treatments (t: 33; n: 1269) had a median overall survival (OS) of 6 months compared with 2.8 months for patients who received best supportive care only (t: 2; n: 234) (P = 0.013). The gemcitabine and platinum-based combination (t: 5; n: 154) provided a median progression-free survival and OS of 4 and 6 months compared with 1.6 and 5.3 for the rest of the regimens (t: 29; n: 1349) (P = 0.059 and 0.10, respectively) and 2.9 and 5.7 for the combination of 5-fluorouracil and platinum agents (t: 12; n: 450) (P = 0.60 and 0.22, respectively).

CONCLUSION(S)

Although not conclusive, these data showed that the advantage of second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer is very limited and there is a need for more studies.

Gemcitabine plus erlotinib followed by capecitabine versus capecitabine plus erlotinib followed by gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised phase 3 trial of the 'Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie' (AIO-PK0104)

OBJECTIVE

AIO-PK0104 investigated two treatment strategies in advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): a reference sequence of gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by 2nd-line capecitabine was compared with a reverse experimental sequence of capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine.

METHODS

281 patients with PC were randomly assigned to 1st-line treatment with either gemcitabine plus erlotinib or capecitabine plus erlotinib. In case of treatment failure (eg, disease progression or toxicity), patients were allocated to 2nd-line treatment with the comparator cytostatic drug without erlotinib. The primary study endpoint was time to treatment failure (TTF) after 1st- and 2nd-line therapy (TTF2; non-inferiority design). KRAS exon 2 mutations were analysed in archival tumour tissue from 173 of the randomised patients.

RESULTS

Of the 274 eligible patients, 43 had locally advanced and 231 had metastatic disease; 140 (51%) received 2nd-line chemotherapy. Median TTF2 was estimated with 4.2 months in both arms; median overall survival was 6.2 months with gemcitabine/erlotinib followed by capecitabine and 6.9 months with capecitabine/erlotinib followed by gemcitabine, respectively (HR 1.02, p=0.90). TTF for 1st-line therapy (TTF1) was significantly prolonged with gemcitabine/erlotinib compared to capecitabine/erlotinib (3.2 vs 2.2 months; HR 0.69, p=0.0034). Skin rash was associated with both TTF2 (rash grade 0/1/2-4:2.9/4.3/6.7 months, p<0.0001) and survival (3.4/7.0/9.6 months, p<0.0001). Each arm showed a safe and manageable toxicity profile during 1st- and 2nd-line therapy. A KRAS wild-type status (52/173 patients, 30%) was associated with an improved overall survival (HR 1.68, p=0.005).

CONCLUSION

Both treatment strategies are feasible and demonstrated comparable efficacy; KRAS may serve as biomarker in patients with advanced PC treated with erlotinib.

Randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group phase III study evaluating aflibercept in patients receiving first-line treatment with gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

This phase III study investigated the addition of aflibercept to gemcitabine, in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous (i.v.) aflibercept, 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or matching placebo combined with gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m(2) i.v. weekly for 7 weeks out of 8, then weekly for 3 weeks out of 4 until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. The primary objective was to demonstrate an improvement in overall survival (OS) between the treatment arms.

RESULTS

The study was stopped for futility following a planned interim analysis of OS in 427 randomised patients. With a median follow-up of 7.9 months, based on the 546 patients at study termination, median OS was 7.8 months in the gemcitabine plus placebo arm (n=275) versus 6.5 months in the gemcitabine plus aflibercept arm (n=271), which was not significant (hazard ratio 1.165, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.921-1.473, p=0.2034). Median progression-free survival was 3.7 months in both arms. Treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were more frequent in the aflibercept than in the placebo-containing arm (23% versus 12%).

CONCLUSION

Adding aflibercept to gemcitabine did not improve OS in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

5-Fluorouracil/leucovorin combined with irinotecan and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) as second-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who have progressed on gemcitabine-based therapy

BACKGROUND/AIMS

There is no standard consensus on a strategy in the second-line setting for gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer. This study evaluated the activity and tolerability of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as a second-line therapy in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma pretreated with a gemcitabine-based regimen.

METHODS

A retrospective survey was carried out on 18 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who had been on gemcitabine-based chemotherapy and were then treated with FOLFIRINOX as a second-line therapy.

RESULTS

One patient (5.6%) had a confirmed complete response, 4 (22.2%) had confirmed partial responses and 5 (27.8%) had stable disease, resulting in a rate of disease control of 55.6% (95% CI, 33.3-77.8%). The median progression-free survival and median survival were 2.8 months and 8.4 months, respectively. Seven patients (38.9%) experienced grade 3-4 neutropenia. Grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic adverse events included nausea (38.9%) and vomiting (16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest the modest clinical activity regarding efficacy and the acceptable toxicity profile with the FOLFIRINOX regimen as a second-line treatment.

FOLFIRI regimen in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma resistant to gemcitabine and platinum-salts

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the FOLFIRI regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) after the failure of gemcitabine and platinum salts.

METHODS: All consecutive patients with histologically confirmed, metastatic PAC and World Health Organization performance status (PS) ≤ 2 received FOLFIRI-1 [irinotecan 180 mg/m² on day 1 and leucovorin 400 mg/m² followed by 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m² bolus, then 5-FU 2400 mg/m² as a 46-h infusion, biweekly] or FOLFIRI-3 (irinotecan 100 mg/m² on day 1 and leucovorin 400 mg/m², then 5-FU 2400 mg/m² as a 46-h infusion and irinotecan 100 mg/m² repeated on day 3, biweekly) after failure of gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapies as a systematic policy in two institutions between January 2005 and May 2010. Tumor response, time to progression (TTP), overall survival rate (OS) and grade 3-4 toxicities were retrospectively studied. Subgroup analyses were performed to search for prognostic factors.

RESULTS: Sixty-three patients (52.4% male, median age 59 years) were analyzed. Among them, 42.9% were PS 0, 38.1% were PS 1 and 19.0% were PS 2. Fifty one patients (81.0%) had liver metastases. Before the FOLFIRI regimen, patients had received 1 line (n = 19), 2 lines (n = 39) or 3 lines (n = 5) of chemotherapy. Median TTP obtained with the line before FOLFIRI was 3.9 mo (95% CI: 3.4-5.3 mo). A total of 480 cycles was completed (median: 6 cycles, range: 1-51 cycles). The main reason for discontinuing FOLFIRI was tumor progression (90.3%). Tumor control was achieved in 25 patients (39.7%) (partial response: n = 5, stable disease: n = 20) with FOLFIRI. Median TTP was 3.0 mo (95% CI: 2.1-3.9 mo) and median OS was 6.6 mo (95% CI: 5.3-8.1 mo). Dose adaptation was required in 36 patients (57.1%). Fifteen patients (23.8%) had grade 3-4 toxicities, mainly hematological (n = 11) or digestive (n = 4). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 3 patients. There was no toxic death. PS 2 was significantly associated with poor TTP [hazard ratio (HR): 16.036, P < 0.0001] and OS (HR: 4.003, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION: The FOLFIRI regimen had an acceptable toxicity and an interesting efficacy in our study, limited to patients in good condition (PS 0-1).