1
|
Kamata K, Imai H, Matsumoto H, Yamashita Y, Kato T, Nishi K, Omoto S, Minaga K, Yamao K, Hyodo T, Im S, Hara A, Yoshikawa T, Ishikawa R, Okamoto A, Yamazaki T, Nakai A, Ueshima K, Chiba Y, Takenaka M, Watanabe T, Kitano M, Kudo M. Low-dose gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel versus standard-dose gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in elderly patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: A randomized Phase II trial. JGH Open 2023; 7:659-666. [PMID: 37744711 PMCID: PMC10517437 DOI: 10.1002/jgh3.12966] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2023] [Accepted: 08/27/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023]
Abstract
Background and Aim A multicenter, open-label randomized Phase II trial was conducted to determine whether low-dose gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) could improve tolerability and show equivalent efficacy to the standard-dose GnP for elderly patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods Consecutive patients aged ≥65 years with metastatic pancreatic cancer who presented at one of four Japanese referral centers between November 2016 and January 2021 were enrolled. The 60 patients were randomly assigned to low- or standard-dose groups with a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the low-dose GnP group received gemcitabine at a dose of 250 mg/m2 and nab-paclitaxel at 125 mg/m2. Results Low-dose GnP significantly decreased the rate of cases requiring dose reduction (16.7% vs 63.3%). The response rate (36.7% vs 33.3%) and progression-free survival (7.3 vs 8 months) were comparable between the low- and standard-dose groups as determined by independent review. The difference in the median overall survival between the two groups was not significant (7.9 vs 12 months). The proportion of patients with hematologic and non-hematologic treatment-related adverse events was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Low-dose GnP had an equivalent efficacy to conventional therapy; however, it did not reduce adverse events.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ken Kamata
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Hajime Imai
- Department of GastroenterologyOkanami General HospitalMieJapan
| | - Hisakazu Matsumoto
- Department of GastroenterologyJapanese Red Cross Wakayama Medical CenterWakayamaJapan
| | - Yukitaka Yamashita
- Department of GastroenterologyJapanese Red Cross Wakayama Medical CenterWakayamaJapan
| | - Takao Kato
- Department of GastroenterologyHyogo Prefectural Awaji Medical CenterHyogoJapan
| | - Katsuhisa Nishi
- Department of GastroenterologyHyogo Prefectural Awaji Medical CenterHyogoJapan
| | - Shunsuke Omoto
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Kosuke Minaga
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Kentaro Yamao
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Tomoko Hyodo
- Department of RadiologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsaka‐SayamaJapan
| | - Sung‐Woon Im
- Department of RadiologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsaka‐SayamaJapan
| | - Akane Hara
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Tomoe Yoshikawa
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Rei Ishikawa
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Ayana Okamoto
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Tomohiro Yamazaki
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Atsushi Nakai
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Kazuomi Ueshima
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Yasutaka Chiba
- Clinical Research CenterKindai University HospitalOsakaJapan
| | - Mamoru Takenaka
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Tomohiro Watanabe
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| | - Masayuki Kitano
- Second Department of Internal MedicineWakayama Medical University School of MedicineWakayamaJapan
| | - Masatoshi Kudo
- Department of Gastroenterology and HepatologyKindai University Faculty of MedicineOsakaJapan
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Rasmussen LS, Winther SB, Chen IM, Weber B, Ventzel L, Liposits G, Johansen JS, Detlefsen S, Egendal I, Shim S, Christensen S, Pfeiffer P, Ladekarl M. A randomized phase II study of full dose gemcitabine versus reduced dose gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in vulnerable patients with non-resectable pancreatic cancer (DPCG-01). BMC Cancer 2023; 23:552. [PMID: 37328835 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-023-11035-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2023] [Accepted: 05/31/2023] [Indexed: 06/18/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND According to current evidence, the best treatment for fit patients with non-resectable pancreatic cancer (PC) is combination chemotherapy, whereas frail patients are recommended gemcitabine (Gem) monotherapy. Randomized controlled trials in colorectal cancer and a post-hoc analysis of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GemNab) in PC suggest, however, that reduced dose of combination chemotherapy may be feasible and more efficient compared to monotherapy in frail patients. The aim of this study is to investigate whether reduced dose GemNab is superior to full dose Gem in patients with resectable PC, who are not candidates for full dose combination chemotherapy in first line. METHODS The Danish Pancreas Cancer Group (DPCG)-01 trial is a national multicenter prospective randomized phase II trial. A total of 100 patients in ECOG performance status 0-2 with non-resectable PC, not candidate for full dose combination chemotherapy in first line, but eligible for full dose Gem, will be included. Patients are randomized 1:1 to either full dose Gem or GemNab in 80% of recommended dose. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints are overall survival, overall response rate, quality of life, toxicity and rate of hospitalizations during treatment. The correlation between blood inflammatory markers, including YKL-40 and IL-6, circulating tumor DNA, and tissue biomarkers of resistance to chemotherapy and outcome will be explored. Finally, the study will include measures of frailty (G8, modified G8, and chair-stand-test) to assess whether scoring would enable a personalized allocation to different treatments or indicates a possibility for interventions. DISCUSSION Single-drug treatment with Gem has for frail patients with non-resectable PC been the main treatment option for more than thirty years, but the impact on outcome is modest. If improved results and sustained tolerability with reduced dose combination chemotherapy can be shown, this could change the future practice for this increasing group of patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05841420. Secondary Identifying No: N-20210068. EudraCT No: 2021-005067-52. PROTOCOL VERSION 1.5, 16-MAY-2023.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Louise Skau Rasmussen
- Department of Oncology and Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Stine B Winther
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Inna M Chen
- Department of Oncology, Herlev-Gentofte University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Britta Weber
- Department of Oncology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Lise Ventzel
- Department of Oncology, University Hospital of Southern Denmark, Vejle, Denmark
| | - Gabor Liposits
- Department of Oncology, Gødstrup Hospital, Herning, Denmark
| | - Julia Sidenius Johansen
- Department of Oncology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Herlev and Gentofte, Herlev, Denmark
| | - Sönke Detlefsen
- Department of Pathology, Odense University Hospital, and Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Ida Egendal
- Center for Clinical Data Science (CLINDA), and Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University and, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Susy Shim
- Department of Oncology and Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, and Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Signe Christensen
- Department of Oncology and Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, Aalborg, Denmark
| | - Per Pfeiffer
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, and Department of Clinical Research, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark
| | - Morten Ladekarl
- Department of Oncology and Clinical Cancer Research Center, Aalborg University Hospital, and Department of Clinical Medicine, Aalborg University, Aalborg, Denmark.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Chang C, Li X, Cheng K, Cai Z, Xiong J, Lv W, Li R, Zhang P, Cao D. A Phase I Study of Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel/S-1 Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Oncologist 2022:6656410. [PMID: 35930304 DOI: 10.1093/oncolo/oyac146] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2022] [Accepted: 06/21/2022] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Systemic chemotherapy is the primary treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). More effective treatment options are highly awaited. The aim of this study was to evaluate the toxicity and feasibility of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel/S-1 (GAS) chemotherapy on a 21-day cycle in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC, determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of S-1 in this regimen, and explore preliminary efficacy. METHODS Eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC received GAS chemotherapy on a 21-day cycle. Fixed-dose nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) and gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) were given intravenously on days 1 and 8. Different doses of S-1 were given orally twice daily from day 1 to day 14 in a 3+3 dose escalation design. According to patients` body surface area, the dose-escalation design was as follows: patients with a body surface area of 1.25-1.5 m2 received S-1 40 mg/day initially and the dose was increased to 60 mg or 80 mg. Patients with a body surface area of more than 1.5 m2 received S-1 60 mg/day initially and the dose was increased to 80 mg or 100 mg. The primary endpoints were to evaluate the toxicity and determine the DLT and MTD of S-1. The secondary endpoint was to evaluate efficacy, including best objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). adverse events (AEs) were evaluated according to the NCI-CTCAE 5.0. Tumor response was assessed using the RECIST 1.1. RESULTS A total of 21 eligible patients were included. Due to the infrequence of patients with a body surface area of 1.25-1.5 m2, only 2 patients were included in cohort of S-1 40 mg. The dose-escalation for patients in this group failed to be enrolled completely. For patients with a body surface area of more than 1.5 m2, 3 DLTs in 7 patients were detected at cohort of S-1 100 mg (grade 3 thrombocytopenia with hemorrhage, grade 3 rash, and grade 3 mucositis/stomatitis). S-1 80 mg/day (body surface area: >1.5 m2) was considered to be the MTD in GAS chemotherapy on a 21-day cycle. No grade 4 AEs or treatment-related deaths were observed. The most commonly occurring hematologic AE of any grade was anemia (38.1%). The most frequent nonhematologic AEs of any grade were peripheral neuropathy (38.1%), dyspepsia (23.8%), constipation (23.8%), and alopecia (23.8%). Response assessment showed that the best ORR was 36.8% (7 of 19 patients) and the DCR was 94.7% (18 of 19 patients). The median PFS was 5.3 (95% CI, 4.6 to 6.0) months and the median OS was 10.3 (95% CI, 8.1 to 12.5) months. CONCLUSION GAS chemotherapy (21-day cycle) with nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2, gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, and S-1 80 mg/day (body surface area: >1.5 m2) was found to have acceptable toxicity and significant clinical control in patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC. We conclude that further trials with this combination are warranted. (Trial Identifier: ChiCTR1900027833 [chictr.org]).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chen Chang
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Xiaofen Li
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Ke Cheng
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Zhaolun Cai
- Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Junjie Xiong
- Department of Pancreatic Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Wanrui Lv
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Ruizhen Li
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Pei Zhang
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| | - Dan Cao
- Department of Abdominal Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, People's Republic of China
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
The impact of age, performance status and comorbidities on nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine effectiveness in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Sci Rep 2022; 12:8244. [PMID: 35581246 PMCID: PMC9114343 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-12214-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/14/2021] [Accepted: 04/27/2022] [Indexed: 11/08/2022] Open
Abstract
Few studies have evaluated the impact of risk factors such as performance status (PS) and comorbidities on overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). We investigated the influence of comorbidity, PS and age on nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine (NabGem) effectiveness profile in naive patients with mPC. 153 patients with mPC treated with NabGem upfront was divided in three groups (score 0 to 3) based on the absence or the presence of one or more risk factors among: age ≥ 70 years, PS 1 and comorbidities and the clinical outcomes was compared. Fifty-five patients were elderly (≥ 70 years), 80 patients have PS 1, whereas the other have PS 0. Patients with no risk factors (score 0) had an overall survival higher (20 months) than patients with one or two risk factors (score 1-2) (OS 11 months) and with three risk factors (score 3) (OS 8 months) (p < 0.01). The difference in OS was also statistically significant in patients without comorbidities (OS 15 months) compared to those with ≥ 1 comorbidity (OS 10 months) (p < 0.001). NabGem chemotherapy represent an effective treatment in naive patients. Age, PS, and comorbidities were prognostic factors in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
|
5
|
Hu J, Jiang J, Liu R, Cheng M, Zhu G, He S, Shi B, Zhao Y, He Z, Yu H, Zhang X, Zheng H, Hua B. Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Traditional Medicine Preparations Combined With Chemotherapy for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Oncol 2022; 12:828450. [PMID: 35280766 PMCID: PMC8904728 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2022.828450] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2021] [Accepted: 01/20/2022] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Traditional medicine preparations (TMPs) combined with chemotherapy is widely used for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC); however, its efficacy and safety are still unclear. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of TMPs combined with chemotherapy for the treatment of APC. Methods A systematic search of eight electronic databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted from inception to October 15, 2021. Tumor response was identified as primary outcome, whereas quality of life (QoL), cancer biomarkers, and adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were identified as secondary outcomes. Quality of the evidence for each outcome was evaluated by GRADE profiler. Results In total, 31 RCTs involving 1,989 individuals were included. This meta-analysis showed that TMPs combined with chemotherapy significantly improved the objective response rate (ORR) (RR=1.64, 95% CI [1.43 to 1.88], p <0.00001), disease control rate (DCR) (RR=1.29, 95% CI [1.21 to 1.38], p <0.00001), and QoL (continuous data: SMD=0.81, 95% CI [0.44 to 1.18], p <0.0001, dichotomous data: RR=1.44, 95% CI [1.22 to 1.70], p<0.0001), compared to those with chemotherapy alone. In addition, the combined treatment group also had lower levels of CA19-9 (SMD=-0.46, 95% CI [-0.90 to -0.02], p=0.04) and CEA (SMD=-0.55, 95% CI [-0.93 to -0.17], p=0.004). Moreover, TMPs reduced the ADRs during chemotherapy. Conclusion This systematic review suggests that TMPs combined with chemotherapy might be a potential option to enhance therapeutic effects and reduce ADRs during the treatment of APC. However, more high-quality randomized controlled trials with more participants are needed. Systematic Review Registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=209825, identifier PROSPERO Number: CRD42021264938.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiaqi Hu
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.,Graduate School, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Juling Jiang
- Xiyuan Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Rui Liu
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Mengqi Cheng
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Guanghui Zhu
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.,Graduate School, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Shulin He
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China.,Graduate School, Beijing University of Chinese Medicine, Beijing, China
| | - Bolun Shi
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Yuwei Zhao
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Zhongning He
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Huibo Yu
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Xing Zhang
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Honggang Zheng
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| | - Baojin Hua
- Department of Oncology, Guang'anmen Hospital, China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Li M. Clinical practice guidelines for the interventional treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer (5th edition). J Interv Med 2021; 4:159-171. [PMID: 35586384 PMCID: PMC8947992 DOI: 10.1016/j.jimed.2021.08.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/21/2021] [Revised: 08/06/2021] [Accepted: 08/08/2021] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer has become a major disease affecting people's health because of its insidiousness, rapid progression and poor prognosis. Based on the practical needs of clinical work, combined with domestic multi-center research and experience, this guideline provides constructive suggestions for the interventional treatment of pancreatic cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maoquan Li
- China Alliance of Cellular and Interventional Therapy Techniques for Diabetic Foot, China
- Technical Committee on Interventional Medicine and Bioengineering of Chinese Intervention Physicians Branch, China
- National Centre for Clinical Medical Research on Radiation and Treatment, China
- Department of Interventional and Vascular Surgery, Affiliated Tenth People's Hospital of Tongji University, China
- Interventional Vascular Institute of Tongji University, Shanghai, 200072, China
- China Alliance of Cellular and Interventional Therapy Techniques for Diabetic Foot, China.
| |
Collapse
|