Definitive Results of a Phase II Trial of Cisplatin, Epirubicin, Continuous-Infusion Fluorouracil, and Gemcitabine in Stage IV Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Peripheral Blood Lymphocyte Percentage May Predict Chemotolerance and Survival in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. Association between Adaptive Immunity and Nutritional State

Pancreatic Carcinoma (PC) cells have the ability to induce patient immunosuppression and to escape immunosurveillance. Low circulating lymphocytes are associated with an advanced stage of PC and reduced survival. Blood lymphocytes expressed as a percentage of Total White Blood Cells (L% TWBC) could predict chemotolerance (n° of tolerated cycles), survival time and Body Weight (BW) more effectively than lymphocytes expressed as an absolute value (LAB > 1500 n°/mm3) or lymphocytes >22%, which is the lowest limit of normal values in our laboratory. Forty-one patients with advanced PC, treated with chemotherapy, were selected for this observational retrospective study. Patients were evaluated at baseline (pre-chemotherapy), and at 6, 12 and 18 months, respectively, after diagnosis of PC. The study found L ≥ 29.7% to be a better predictor of survival (COX model, using age, sex, BW, serum creatinine, bilirubin and lymphocytes as covariates), chemotolerance (r = +0.50, p = 0.001) and BW (r = +0.35, p = 0.027) than LAB > 1500 or L > 22%. BW did not significantly correlate with chemotolerance or survival. The preliminary results of this study suggest that L ≥ 29.7% is more effective than LAB > 1500 or L > 22% at predicting chemotolerance, survival time and nutritional status. A possible impact of nutritional status on chemotherapy and survival seems to be lymphocyte-mediated given the association between BW and L%. This study may serve as the basis for future research to explore whether nutritional interventions can improve lymphopenia, and if so, how this may be possible.

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.

Preclinical Rationale for the Phase III Trials in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Is Wishful Thinking Clouding Successful Drug Development for Pancreatic Cancer?

Prior phase III trials in advanced pancreatic cancer have been predominantly unsuccessful. In this review, we attempt to understand how past preclinical data were translated into phase III clinical trials in metastatic pancreatic cancer as described in the article. A systematic literature review conducted through the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases, from January 1997 to June 2015 using key words-phase III clinical trials, metastatic/advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma or pancreatic cancer identified 30 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that met criteria. The trials were limited to RCTs in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The success rate of first-line phase III studies in advanced pancreatic cancer was only 13%. In 60% of the RCTs, no preclinical experiments were referenced in biologically cognate pancreatic models. Nine (30%) of the RCTs were designed based on preclinical evidence from in vitro cell lines alone without additional in vivo validation in xenograft models. It remains uncertain how strongly the preclinical data influence the development of clinical regimens but so far the studies developed based on more solid preclinical evidence have been successful.

Phase II clinical trials on investigational drugs for the treatment of pancreatic cancers

INTRODUCTION

Despite some recent advances in treatment options, pancreatic cancer remains a devastating disease with poor outcomes. In a trend contrary to most malignancies, both incidence and mortality continue to rise due to pancreatic cancer. The majority of patients present with advanced disease and there are no treatment options for this stage that have demonstrated a median survival > 1 year. As the penultimate step prior to Phase III studies involving hundreds of patients, Phase II clinical trials provide an early opportunity to evaluate the efficacy of new treatments that are desperately needed for this disease.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers the results of published Phase II clinical trials in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma published within the past 5 years. The treatment results are framed in the context of the current standards of care and the historic challenge of predicting Phase III success from Phase II trial results.

EXPERT OPINION

Promising therapies remain elusive in pancreatic cancer based on recent Phase II clinical trial results. Optimization and standardization of clinical trial design in the Phase II setting, with consistent incorporation of biomarkers, is needed to more accurately identify promising therapies that warrant Phase III evaluation.

Opportunities for translation: targeting DNA repair pathways in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains one of the poorest prognosis neoplasms. It is typified by high levels of genomic aberrations and copy-number variation, intra-tumoural heterogeneity and resistance to conventional chemotherapy. Improved therapeutic options, ideally targeted against cancer-specific biological mechanisms, are urgently needed. Although induction of DNA damage and/or modulation of DNA damage response pathways are associated with the activity of a number of conventional PDAC chemotherapies, the effectiveness of this approach in the treatment of PDAC has not been comprehensively reviewed. Here, we review chemotherapeutic agents that have shown anti-cancer activity in PDAC and whose mechanisms of action involve modulation of DNA repair pathways. In addition, we highlight novel potential targets within these pathways based on the emerging understanding of PDAC biology and their exploitation as targets in other cancers.

Prognostic factors in gemcitabine-cisplatin polychemotherapy regimens in pancreatic cancer: XPD-Lys751Gln polymorphism strikes back

The use of platinated agents in combination chemotherapy regimens for advanced pancreatic cancer is controversial owing to the lack of an outstanding impact on the outcome and a substantial increase in hematologic and extra-hematologic toxicities. Pharmacogenetic studies to identify patients who could benefit most from such therapies are urgently needed. The Xeroderma-Pigmentosum group-D polymorphism at codon-751 (XPD-Lys751Gln) emerged as the most significant independent predictor for death- and progression-risk in our previous study on functional polymorphisms in 122 advanced pancreatic cancer patients treated with cisplatin-docetaxel-capecitabine-gemcitabine and cisplatin-epirubicin-capecitabine-gemcitabine (or EC-GemCap). To confirm the prognostic role of this variable, we further evaluated the correlation of XPD-Lys751Gln with outcome in another 125 patients treated with the same regimens, and 90 treated with gemcitabine monotherapy. Genotyping was successfully carried out in the vast majority of DNA samples. Genotype frequencies followed Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium, and XPD-Lys751Gln was associated with differential progression-free and overall-survival. Multivariate analysis confirmed its prognostic significance in platinum-based regimens. In particular, XPD-Gln751Gln was significantly associated with risk of death (hazard ratio, HR = 1.7, 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.1-2.6, p = 0.011) and risk of progression (HR = 1.7, 95% CI, 1.1-2.5, p = 0.013). No correlation was observed in gemcitabine monotherapy-treated patients. The analysis of DNA damage using extra-long-PCR in lymphocytes supported the association of XPD-Gln751Gln with greater resistance to cisplatin-induced damage. The increasing evidence of XPD-Lys751Gln impact on the outcome of gemcitabine-cisplatin-based polychemotherapy leads to plan prospective studies to validate the role of this polymorphism as a new tool for optimization of the currently available treatments in pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: a critical review

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is among the deadliest tumors. Due to intrinsic chemo- and radio-resistance, surgical resection remains the only chance for cure. However surgery alone is unable to considerably improve survival and complementary chemotherapy and radiotherapy in a multimodal approach have been tested. Adjuvant chemotherapy yielded a modest outcome improvement, whereas the use of adjuvant chemoradiation is highly controversial. In this scenario, the neoadjuvant approach has a strong theoretical rationale, but limited information on the efficacy of this strategy is available.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This review critically overviews the current knowledge, the rationale, the available data and information on neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

The very early systemic dissemination of pancreatic cancer endorses the rationale for an up-front use of systemic therapy. However, evidence collected so far depends on retrospective data, small case series that did not balance the different characteristics of patients suitable for surgery before or after neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Currently there is no straightforward evidence to support the routine clinical use of this strategy. Only a properly designed randomized trial testing combination chemotherapy regimens selected on the basis of their efficacy and activity against metastatic disease can address this issue.

Role of taxanes in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most deadly cancers and is characterized by a poor prognosis. Single agent gemcitabine, despite its limited activity and modest impact on disease outcome, is considered as the standard therapy in pancreatic cancer. Most of the combination regimens used in the treatment of this disease, also including the targeted agents, did not improve the outcome of patients. Also, taxanes have been tested as single agent and in combination chemotherapy, both in first line and as salvage chemotherapy, as another possible option for treating pancreatic cancer. The inclusion of taxanes in combination with gemcitabine as upfront therapy obtained promising results. Accordingly, taxanes, and above all, new generation taxanes, appear to be suitable candidates for further testing to assess their role against pancreatic cancer in various clinical settings.

Combined modality treatments in pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Of all the carcinomas, pancreatic carcinoma (PC) has the highest mortality rate, with a 1- and 5-year survival rate of 25% and less than 5% respectively. This is regardless of the stage at diagnosis.

AREAS COVERED

In this review relevant literature assessing the evidence regarding preoperative and adjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) is discussed. Furthermore, new therapeutic approaches are summarized, while the future direction regarding the multimodality approach to PC is also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The role of combined-modality therapy for PC is continuously evolving. There have been several recent developments, as well as the completion of major, multi-institutional clinical trials. One of the challenges for the busy clinician is to appreciate the variation in staging, surgical expertise, and application of either definitive CRT or neo-adjuvant CRT for local and/or borderline disease.

Dose-intense PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a dose-finding study

The aim of this study was to assess the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of an intensified PEFG regimen administered every 14 days to patients with Stage III or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Twenty-nine patients received fixed doses of both epirubicin (30 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (200 mg/m2/day on Days 1-14) and of escalating doses of cisplatin and gemcitabine. The MTD was cisplatin 30 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 800 mg/m2. With respect to classical PEFG, intensified regimen potentially improved the dose-intensity of both cisplatin and epirubicin by 50 percent and of gemcitabine by 33 percent, reduced Grade 3-4 haematological toxicity and the number of outpatient accesses.

A randomized phase II trial of two different 4-drug combinations in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: cisplatin, capecitabine, gemcitabine plus either epirubicin or docetaxel (PEXG or PDXG regimen)

PURPOSE

PEFG regimen (P:cisplatin, E:epirubicin, F:5-fluorouracil, G:gemcitabine) significantly prolonged progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) with respect to standard gemcitabine. The current trial was aimed at assessing whether the replacement of E with docetaxel (D) may improve 6 months PFS (PFS6).

METHODS

Chemo-naive patients with stage III or metastatic PA received P (30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15), G (800 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15), and capecitabine (1,250 mg/m(2)/day days 1-28, without a break) and were randomized to receive either D at 25-30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15 (arm A: PDXG regimen) or E at 30 mg/m(2) day 1 and 15 (arm B: PEXG regimen). Cycles were repeated every 28 days for a maximum of 6 months. The Fleming design was used to calculate the sample size on the probability of being PFS6. Assuming P0 = 40% and P1 = 60%, α = 0.05 and β = 0.10; the study was to enroll 52 patients per arm.

RESULTS

Between July 2005 and September 2008, 105 patients were enrolled, stratified by stage and randomized. Patients' characteristics were (A/B) the following: median age 61/59, PS >70 92/88%, metastatic disease 66/65%. PFS6 was 58%, and median OS was 11 months in both arms. A partial response was observed in 60/37% of patients. Main per cycle G3-4 toxicity was the following: neutropenia 4/13%, thrombocytopenia 2/4%, anemia 4/4%, and fatigue 6/3%.

CONCLUSIONS

The inclusion of D instead of E yielded more objective response and less G3-4 neutropenia but did not improve PFS and OS. The present trial confirms the relevant impact on outcome of advanced PA of 4-drug regimens.

Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer: Time for phase III testing?

This paper discusses the rationale for phase III testing of neoadjuvant therapy in patients affected by resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The therapeutic management of patients affected by resectable pancreatic cancer is particularly troublesome due to the aggressiveness of the disease and to the limited efficacy and sometimes unfavourable risk-benefit ratio of the available therapeutic tools. Conflicting data on the role of adjuvant chemoradiation have been reported, while adjuvant single-agent chemotherapy significantly improved overall survival (OS) when compared to surgery alone. However, the OS figures for adjuvant chemotherapy remain disappointing. In effect, pancreatic cancer exhibits a prominent tendency to recur after a brief median time interval from surgery and extra-pancreatic dissemination represents the predominant pattern of disease failure. Neoadjuvant treatment has a strong rationale in this disease but limited information on the efficacy of this approach is available from single arm trials with low levels of evidence. Thus, in spite of two decades of investigation there is currently no evidence to support the routine use of pre-surgical therapy in clinical practice. To foster knowledge on the optimal management of this disease, and to produce evidence-based treatment guidelines, there is no alternative to well designed randomized trials. Systemic chemotherapy is a candidate for testing because it is supported by a more robust rationale than chemoradiation. Combination chemotherapy regimens with elevated activity in advanced disease warrant investigation. Caution would suggest the running of an exploratory phase II randomized trial before embarking on a large phase III study.

Phase 1 clinical trials in 83 patients with pancreatic cancer: The M. D. Anderson Cancer Center experience

BACKGROUND

The outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer treated on early phase clinical trials have not been systematically analyzed. The purpose of this study was to report the presenting characteristics and outcomes of patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer treated on phase 1 clinical trials at a single institution.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the records of consecutive patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who were treated in the Phase I Clinical Trials Program at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center from November 2004 to March 2009. Data recorded and analyzed included survival, response, and disease characteristics.

RESULTS

Eighty-three patients were identified. The median age was 62 years (range, 39-81 years). Of 78 patients evaluable for response, 2 (3%) had a partial response (PR), and 10 (13%) had stable disease (SD) for ≥ 4 months. With a median follow-up for survivors of 3.7 months, the median survival from presentation in the phase 1 clinic was 5.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-6.2). The median overall survival from diagnosis was 22.1 months (95% CI, 17.9-26.5). The median time to treatment failure was 1.5 months (95% CI, 1.3-1.8). Independent factors associated with lower rates of PR/SD were liver metastases (P = .001) and performance status >0 (P = .01). Independent factors associated with shorter survival were liver metastases (P = .007), low calcium level (P = .015), and elevated CEA level (>6 ng/mL) (P = .005).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that phase 1 clinical trials offer a reasonable therapeutic approach for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

An Italian study on treatment trends and outcomes of patients with stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma in the gemcitabine era: is it time to change?

A series of 650 patients treated between 1997 and 2007 at 10 Italian centers was analyzed to assess treatment trends and efficacy in stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Data on patient characteristics, treatment and outcomes were collected. The inclusion criteria were pathological diagnosis of stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma; age more than 18 years, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status less than 3, and no past therapy. Most patients (95%) received up-front chemotherapy, which mainly consisted of gemcitabine alone (N=323), gemcitabine-based four-drug combinations (N=107), gemcitabine-platinum compound doublets (N=87), or intra-arterial gemcitabine-free triplets (N=57). The use of gemcitabine-platinum compound doublets increased over time (1997-2001: 2%; 2002-2007: 21%) whereas an inverse trend was observed for gemcitabine (71-61%). No overall survival (OS) difference was observed between patients enrolled in clinical trials and those not enrolled. The median and 1-year OS were 9.5 months and 35.5% for patients treated with gemcitabine; 8.9 months and 36.8% for those treated with gemcitabine-free intra-arterial triplets; 13.3 months and 55.8% for those treated with gemcitabine-platinating agent doublets; and 16.2 months and 62.6% for those treated with gemcitabine-based four-drug combinations. Moreover, the median and 1-year OS were 12.7 months and 51.4% in patients who underwent planned consolidation chemoradiation, and 8.4 months and 30.4% in patients who did not. The use of a strategy consisting of a gemcitabine-platinating agent containing chemotherapy followed by consolidation chemoradiation has been increasing over time and may represent a suitable choice in the therapeutic management of stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine (PEFG) regimen in advanced biliary tract adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Biliary tract adenocarcinoma (BTA) is an uncommon tumor with a poor prognosis and no standard, systemic chemotherapy. The combined cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, and gemcitabine (PEFG) regimen is an effective, upfront treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. In this study, the authors assessed the activity and safety of this combination regimen in patients with advanced BTA.

METHODS

PEFG (cisplatin 40 mg/m(2) and epirubicin 40 mg/m(2) on Day 1; gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2) on Days 1 and 8; and 5-fluorouracil [FU] 200 mg/m(2) daily as a continuous infusion) was administered to chemotherapy-naive patients who had a cytologic or histologic diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic BTA, aged <or=75 years, and a performance status (PS) >60 either until they had evidence progressive disease or for a maximum of 6 months. Tumor size was assessed every 2 months during treatment.

RESULTS

Between May 1999 and December 2005, 37 patients (62% metastatic) who had a median age of 62 years and a median PS of 90 received the PEFG regimen at the authors' institution. Primary tumor sites were the intrahepatic bile duct in 10 patients (27%), the extrahepatic bile duct in 8 patients (22%), the gallbladder in 12 patients (32%), and the ampulla of Vater in 7 patients (19%). A partial response was observed in 16 patients (43%), and stable disease was observed in 12 patients (32%). The median overall survival (OS) was 12.1 months, and the 1-year OS rate was 52%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 7.9 months, and the 6-month PFS rate was 67%. The main grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia in 18% of cycles followed by thrombocytopenia in 9% of cycles, nausea/vomiting in 5% of cycles, and febrile neutropenia, fatigue, anemia, and stomatitis in 2% of cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results demonstrated that PEFG was an active regimen with a manageable toxicity profile for patients with advanced BTA.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy and gemcitabine for locally advanced pancreatic cancer

PURPOSE

Patients with nonmetastatic locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer have a dismal prognosis. Conventional concurrent chemoradiotherapy requires 6 weeks of daily treatment and can be arduous. We explored the safety and effectiveness of a 3-day course of hypofractionated stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) followed by gemcitabine in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 36 patients with nonmetastatic, locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer with ≥12 months of follow-up were included. They received three fractions of 8, 10, or 12 Gy (total dose, 24-36 Gy) of SBRT according to the tumor location in relation to the stomach and duodenum, using fiducial-based respiratory motion tracking on a robotic radiosurgery system. The patients were then offered gemcitabine for 6 months or until tolerance or disease progression.

RESULTS

With an overall median follow-up of 24 months (range, 12-33), the local control rate was 78%, the median overall survival time was 14.3 months, the median carbohydrate antigen 19-9-determined progression-free survival time was 7.9 months, and the median computed tomography-determined progression-free survival time was 9.6 months. Of the 36 patients, 28 (78%) eventually developed distant metastases. Six patients (17%) were free of progression at the last follow-up visit (range, 13-30 months) as determined by normalized tumor markers with stable computed tomography findings. Nine Grade 2 (25%) and five Grade 3 (14%) toxicities attributable to SBRT occurred.

CONCLUSION

Hypofractionated SBRT can be delivered quickly and effectively in patients with nonmetastatic, locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer with acceptable side effects and minimal interference with gemcitabine chemotherapy.

Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: current standards, future directions

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth most common cause of cancer death in the United States. In the landmark study in 1997, which established the central although modest role of gemcitabine in this disease, progress has been incremental. Significant developments have been an increased acceptance for combination chemotherapy in patients with good performance status in addition to an increased understanding of tumorigenesis. The parallel technologic and engineering developments that have occurred hold the promise of exploiting this understanding. This review attempts to summarize the standard therapeutic approach to metastatic pancreatic cancer and point to areas that hold promise for the future.

Outcome of upfront combination chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

The role and timing of chemotherapy and radiation for treating stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains controversial.

METHODS

Treatment-naive patients with stage III non-resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated with PEFG/PEXG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil (F)/capecitabine (X), gemcitabine) or PDXG (docetaxel substituting epirubicin) regimen for 6 months followed by radiotherapy (50-60 Gy) with concurrent F or X or G.

RESULTS

Ninety-one patients were registered between April 1997 and December 2007. Forty-three patients (47%) had a partial remission and 38 (42%) had a stable disease. Thirteen patients (14%) were radically resected yielding one pathologic complete remission. Median survival (OS) was 16.2 months. Median progression-free survival was 9.9 months. Pattern of failure consisted of isolated local failure (N = 26, 35%); both local and systemic failure (N = 14, 19%); isolated systemic failure (N = 35, 47%).

CONCLUSION

Combination chemotherapy with four-drug regimens followed by chemoradiation was a feasible strategy showing relevant results in stage III pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) regimen as second-line therapy in patients with progressive or recurrent pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy

OBJECTIVE

The therapeutic arsenal for salvage therapy in pancreatic cancer is limited. PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil [FU], gemcitabine) regimen is an effective upfront treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer. The activity and safety of this combination regimen were assessed by means of an observational study in a population of patients with progressive or recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma after gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy.

METHODS

Patients with age <76 years, Karnofsky performance status >50 were treated with either classic PEFG (until April 2004: cisplatin and epirubicin 40 mg/m day 1, gemcitabine 600 mg/m day 1 and 8, FU 200 mg/m/d continuous infusion day 1-28) or dose-intense PEFG (since May 2004: cisplatin and epirubicin 30 mg/m, gemcitabine 800 mg/m every 14 days; FU 200 mg/m/d continuous infusion day 1-28) until progressive disease or a maximum of 6 cycles of 28 days.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients (37 metastatic) received 69 cycles of classic PEFG (18 patients) or 104 cycles of dose-intense PEFG (28 patients) as second-line therapy. Prior treatment consisted of single agent gemcitabine (N = 17), gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (N = 4), or PEFG regimen (N = 25). Median previous progression-free survival was 7.6 months. Dose intensity (mg/m/wk) with classic PEFG was cisplatin and epirubicin 8.5; gemcitabine 230; FU 1035 and with dose-intense PEFG was cisplatin and epirubicin 11.5 (+36%); gemcitabine 259 (+13%); FU 1046 (+1%). Main grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 26 patients (56%), thrombocytopenia in 10 (22%), anemia in 11 (24%), fatigue and stomatitis in 4 (9%), vomiting, diarrhea and hand-foot syndrome in 2 (4%). Partial response was observed in 11 patients (24%) (5 classic PEFG 28% + 6 dose-intense PEFG 21%). Median and 1-year survival was 8.3 months (8.0 vs. 9.0 months) and 26% (17% vs. 32%). Median and 6-months progression-free survival was 5.0 months (4.5 vs. 5.0 months) and 34% (33% vs. 38%).

CONCLUSIONS

PEFG regimen in gemcitabine refractory pancreatic cancer had an acceptable toxicity profile and interesting activity, and may constitute a treatment option in this setting.

PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: the ghost regimen

The consensus report of the International Society of Gastrointestinal Oncology on the therapeutic management of advanced pancreatic cancer is commented. In the context of the available literature, a critical and methodological analysis supporting the role of cisplatin, epirubicin, 5- fluorouracil, gemcitabine (PEFG) regimen in the treatment of unresectable and metastatic pancreatic cancer is provided. In particular, the clinical relevance of the outcome observed in the phase III trial comparing PEFG regimen to standard gemcitabine is highlighted. Results of other recent trials comparing gemcitabine-erlotinib, gemcitabine-capecitabine and gemcitabine-oxaliplatin combinations to single agent gemcitabine are briefly commented from a clinical perspective.

Impact of chemoradiotherapy after disease control with chemotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma in GERCOR phase II and III studies

PURPOSE

The management of locally advanced (LA) pancreatic cancer patients remains controversial. To select patients who could benefit from chemoradiotherapy (CRT), the therapeutic strategy used by the Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie (GERCOR) consisted of initial chemotherapy (CT) for at least 3 months. The decision to administer CRT or continue CT in nonprogressive patients was the investigator's choice.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of outcome in 181 patients with LA pancreatic cancer (76 women and 105 men; mean age, 61 years; range, 37 to 85 years) enrolled onto prospective phase II and III GERCOR studies was performed to compare the survival of patients who received CRT with that of patients who continued CT alone.

RESULTS

Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) times for the 181 patients were 6.3 and 11.4 months, respectively. Fifty-three patients (29.3%) had metastatic disease after 3 months of CT and were not eligible for CRT. Among the 128 remaining patients (70.3%) who had no disease progression and who were, therefore, eligible for CRT, 72 (56%) received CRT (group A), whereas 56 (44%) continued with CT (group B). The two groups were balanced for initial characteristics (performance status, sex, age, and type of CT), as well as for induction CT results. In groups A and B, the median PFS times were 10.8 and 7.4 months, respectively (P = .005), and the median OS times were 15.0 and 11.7 months, respectively (P = .0009).

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that, after control of disease by initial CT, CRT could significantly improve survival in patients with LA pancreatic cancer compared with CT alone. A prospective phase III study is ongoing to evaluate this strategy.

Gemcitabine, oxaliplatin and weekly high-dose 5-FU as 24-h infusion in chemonaive patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multicenter phase II trial of the Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internistische Onkologie (AIO)

BACKGROUND

Combinations of gemcitabine-oxaliplatin, gemcitabine-5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and 5-FU-oxaliplatin have synergistic activity and nonoverlapping adverse effect profiles. This trial assessed efficacy and safety of the triple combination gemcitabine-oxaliplatin and infusional 5-FU in patients with locally advanced (n=11) or metastatic (n=32) pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 43 eligible patients were treated with intravenous infusions of gemcitabine (900 mg/m2 over 30 min), followed by oxaliplatin (65 mg/m2 over 2 h) and 5-FU (1500 mg/m2 over 24 h) on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle.

RESULTS

Among all 43 patients, the tumor response rate was 19% [95% confidence interval 7% to 30%]. Nine patients were nonassessable for response because they did not complete the first two cycles of chemotherapy due to rapid disease progression, early death or treatment refusal. One patient was lost to follow-up. Median time to progression and overall survival were 5.7 and 7.5 months. Principal grade III/IV toxic effects were leucopenia in 11 (2%), thrombocytopenia in 13 (2%), nausea in 13 (0%), anorexia 16 (7%) and sensory neuropathy in 18 (0%) of patients. Unexpected cardiotoxicity was observed in this trial.

CONCLUSION

Response rates and survival of the three-drug combination compare favorably with single-agent gemcitabine, but do not exceed results for doublets.

Dose-intense PEFG (cisplatin, epirubicin, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine) in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

PEFG regimen (cisplatin and epirubicin 40 mg/m2 day 1, gemcitabine 600 mg/m2 days 1 and 8, 5-fluorouracil (FU) 200 mg/m2/day continuous infusion) significantly improved the outcome of patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) with respect to standard gemcitabine in a previous phase III trial. This regimen was subsequently modified in a dose-finding study by increasing dose intensity of cisplatin and epirubicin (both at 30 mg/m2 every 14 days) and of gemcitabine (at 800 mg/m2 every 14 days). Results of a consecutive series treated by dose-intense PEFG regimen are herewith reported.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Dose-intense PEFG was administered to chemotherapy-naive patients with stages III-IV PA, < 75 years, performance status (PS) > 50, till progressive disease or for a maximum of 6 months.

RESULTS

Between January 2004 and June 2005, 49 (31 or 63% metastatic) patients, median age 62 years, median PS 80, were treated with dose-intense PEFG. Partial response and stable disease was observed in 24 (49%) and 16 (33%) patients, respectively; 31 patients were progression-free at 6 months (PFS-6 = 63%). Median survival was 10.5 months and 1-year overall survival (OS) was 48% (95% confidence interval: 33-61%). Main grade 3-4 toxicity was: neutropenia in 26% of patients, stomatitis and fatigue in 8%, anaemia, diarrhoea, nausea/vomit in 6%, febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopaenia in 4%, hand-foot syndrome in 2%.

CONCLUSION

When compared with 84 patients treated by classical PEFG at the same institution, dose-intense PEFG was not inferior in terms of PFS-6 (63 versus 57%), 1-year OS (48 versus 42%) and response rate (49 versus 49%); it allowed to increase dose intensity for gemcitabine by 32%, for cisplatin and epirubicin by 36% (FU reduced by 3%), to significantly reduce grade 3-4 hematological toxicity (neutropenia: 26 versus 86%; P < 0.00001; thrombocytopaenia: 4 versus 58%; P < 0.00001) and to reduce by one-third the number of outpatient accesses. The new PEFG schedule appears more suitable for clinical use and should be preferred as a basis for further development of therapeutic strategies against pancreatic cancer.

Chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

Single-agent gemcitabine was established as standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after a superior clinical benefit response was demonstrated in a randomized study comparing it to 5-fluorouracil (FU). Until recently, many subsequent randomized trials of newer, often gemcitabine-based combinations have not been able to show improved survival over gemcitabine. Combination gemcitabine and capecitabine is likely to become the preferred standard treatment, at least in the UK, on the basis of the positive interim results of the UK National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) randomized study of chemotherapy with this combination. At present, there is no standard second-line treatment for patients who have become refractory to gemcitabine, although a recently reported study has suggested that oxaliplatin with FU and leucovorin is superior to best supportive care in these patients. This article will review and discuss the clinical trials of chemotherapy for this disease, including the more recent trials, which have included the novel targeted agents.

Fixed dose-rate infusion of gemcitabine in combination with cisplatin and UFT in advanced carcinoma of the pancreas

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine is currently considered the standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). Cisplatin and a fluoropyrimidine have some activity in the treatment of this cancer. The aim of this trial is to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of a fixed dose-rate infusion of gemcitabine associated with cisplatin and UFT in patients with APC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-six chemotherapy-naïve patients with APC that was either unresectable or metastatic were included in this phase II study. All of them had Karnofsky performance status > or =50 and unidimensionally measurable disease. Treatment consisted of gemcitabine 1,200 mg/m2 given as a 120-min infusion weekly for three consecutive weeks, cisplatin 50 mg/m2 on day 1 and oral UFT 400 mg/m2/day (in two to three daily doses) on days 1 to 21; cycles of treatment were given every 28 days.

RESULTS

A total of 208 cycles of chemotherapy were given with a median of 4 per patient. Fourteen patients (30%) achieved partial responses (95% CI 19-48%) and 17 (37%) had stable disease. The median time to progression was 5 months, and the median overall survival 9 months. Nineteen patients (49%; 95% CI 32-64%) had a clinical benefit response. Grade 3-4 WHO toxicities were as follows: neutropaenia in 26 patients (57%), with 5 cases of febrile neutropaenia (11%), thrombocytopaenia in 15 (33%), anaemia in six (13%), diarrhoea in 5 (11%), asthenia in 2 (4%) and mucositis in 1 (2%). Seven patients required hospitalisation for treatment-related complications.

CONCLUSION

A fixed dose-rate infusion of gemcitabine associated with cisplatin and UFT is active in patients with APC, though at the cost of considerable toxicity.

A phase II study of weekly cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: is this a strategy still worth pursuing?

OBJECTIVES

A phase 2 study to assess the activity of the cisplatin-gemcitabine combination in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced/metastatic/relapsed adenocarcinoma of the pancreas received cisplatin 25 mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Radiologic response was assessed after 3 cycles, and treatment continued for up to 6 cycles in the absence of disease progression.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were enrolled, 35 patients were evaluable for toxicity. Hematological toxicity was significant but mostly asymptomatic with grade 3 to 4 (% of patients): leucopenia, 40%; neutropenia, 60%; thrombocytopenia, 60%. There were only 3 episodes of neutropenic sepsis and 2 significant bleeding episodes. Grade 3 to 4 nonhematological toxicities were uncommon but included constipation, infection without neutropenia, lethargy, and thromboembolic events. Of 32 evaluable patients, 62.8% achieved stable disease (SD) or better (SD, 53.4%; partial response, 9.4%). Twenty-nine patients were evaluable for clinical benefit response: 11 (31%) were clinical benefit responders, whereas 13 (36%) remained stable. With complete follow-up, the median time to disease progression was 5.75 months; median survival was 9.5 months, 6-month survival was 72.2%, and 1-year survival was 41.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin is clearly an active regimen and may improve survival based on our 1-year and median survival findings and results from other institutions. However, only an adequately powered randomized controlled trial will assess any real survival benefit over single agent gemcitabine.

Cytotoxic Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment for pancreatic cancer as most patients present with advanced disease, which precludes locoregional treatment. However, the efficacy of chemotherapy is limited. Gemcitabine is the only agent that improves symptoms and confers a modest survival advantage. Many combination therapy regimens have been studied in phase II settings. Eleven randomised phase III trials have been conducted to compare gemcitabine-containing regimens with gemcitabine monotherapy since gemcitabine became available clinically. The combination of gemcitabine plus capecitabine has demonstrated a survival advantage over gemcitabine, whereas gemcitabine plus oxaliplatin and gemcitabine plus cisplatin have shown improved progression-free survival or time to tumour progression but failed to demonstrate a survival advantage over gemcitabine. The search for effective therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer continues. Gemcitabine in combination with cytotoxic agents or molecular targeted agents hold promise.

Decreased total lymphocyte counts in pancreatic cancer: an index of adverse outcome

OBJECTIVES

An impaired host immunity might concur in determining the dismal prognosis of patients with pancreatic cancer (PC). Our aim was to ascertain whether the immunophenotype pattern of blood lymphocytes in PC correlates with tumor stage, grade, or survival.

METHODS

We studied 115 patients with PC, 44 with chronic pancreatitis (CP), 23 with tumors of the pancreatico-biliary tract, and 34 healthy controls (CS). Survival data were available for 77 patients with PC. Lymphocyte subsets were determined by fluorescent activated cell sorter (FACS) analysis.

RESULTS

In patients with PC, total lymphocyte counts were lower than in CP or CS, and CD8 lymphocyte subset levels were higher with respect to CS. Lower circulating lymphocytes were found in advanced PC stages (IIB-IV; chi2 = 11.55, P < 0.05) compared with stages 0 to IIA. Cox regression analysis, made considering total lymphocyte counts and tumor stage as covariates, was found to be significant for both tumor stage (P < 0.001) and total lymphocyte counts (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction of total lymphocytes in blood is the main immunologic change in advanced PC. The survival of these patients depends mainly on tumor stage, but it is also affected by the number of circulating lymphocytes, suggesting that the immune system plays an important role in pancreatic adenocarcinoma immunosurveillance and immunoediting.

Gemcitabine with or without continuous infusion 5-FU in advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised phase II trial of the Italian oncology group for clinical research (GOIRC)

This study was performed to determine the activity of adding continuous infusion (CI) of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) to gemcitabine (GEM) vs GEM alone in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). In all, 94 chemo-naïve patients with APC were randomised to receive GEM alone (arm A: 1000 mg m⁻² per week for 7 weeks followed by a 2 week rest period, then weekly for 3 consecutive weeks out of every 4 weeks) or in combination with CI 5-FU (arm B: CI 5-FU 200 mg m⁻² day⁻¹ for 6 weeks followed by a 2 week rest period, then for 3 weeks every 4 weeks). Overall response rate (RR) was the primary end point and criteria for decision were planned according to the Simon's optimal two-stage design. The overall RR was 8% (arm A) and 11% (arm B) (95% confidence interval: 0.5–16% and 2–22%), respectively, and stable disease was 29 and 28%. The median duration of RR was 34 weeks (range 25–101 weeks) for GEM and 26 weeks (range 16–46 weeks) for the combination. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 14 weeks (range 2–65 weeks) and 18 weeks (range 4–51 weeks), respectively. The median overall survival (OS) was 31 weeks (range 1–101 weeks) and 30 weeks (1–101 weeks). Toxicity was mild in both arms. This study does not show promising activity in terms of RR, PFS and OS for the double combination arm in APC.

Final results of a prospective trial of a PEFG (Cisplatin, Epirubicin, 5-Fluorouracil, Gemcitabine) regimen followed by radiotherapy after curative surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Postoperative management of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) is controversial.

METHODS

The aim of this pilot study was to assess the feasibility of postoperative combination chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy in patients aged 18-70 years with a histological diagnosis of PA, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) > or =70. Cisplatin and epirubicin 40 mg/m2 on day 1, gemcitabine 600 mg/m2 on day 1 and 8, and 5-fluorouracil 200 mg/m2/day as protracted infusion (PEFG regimen) were delivered every 28 days for 4 cycles. Assuming a minimum one-year disease-free survival (DFS) of interest of 65% and a maximum of low interest of 45% (alpha 0.05; beta 0.10), the target enrollment was 51 patients, and the strategy would be considered to deserve further analysis if more than 29 patients were DF at one-year from surgery.

RESULTS

Fifty-one patients, KPS >80: 29, median tumor size 3.5 cm, stage II/III/IVA: 2/34/13, grade 3-4: 22, positive resection margins: 26, node positive: 46, received 179 cycles of chemotherapy. Main grade 3/4 toxicity consisted of neutropenia (51%), thrombocytopenia (18%), and anemia (4%). One-year DFS was 67 +/- 7%. Two-year overall survival was 53 +/- 7%.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative management of PA with this multimodality strategy was well tolerated and yielded a promising outcome.

Gemcitabine versus cisplatin, epirubicin, fluorouracil, and gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer: a randomised controlled multicentre phase III trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma have a poor response, progression-free survival, and overall survival with standard treatment. We aimed to assess whether a four-drug regimen could improve 4 month progression-free survival compared with gemcitabine alone.

METHODS

In a randomised multicentre phase III trial, 52 patients were randomly assigned to 40 mg/m2 cisplatin and 40 mg/m2 epirubicin both given on day 1, 600 mg/m2 gemcitabine given intravenously over 1 h on days 1 and 8, and 200 mg/m2 fluorouracil a day given by continuous infusion on days 1-28 of a 4-week cycle (PEFG regimen), and 47 were assigned to 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine given intravenously over 30 min once a week for 7 of 8 consecutive weeks in cycle 1 and for 3 of 4 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoint was 4-month progression-free survival. Secondary endpoints were overall survival, objective response, safety, and quality of life. Analyses were by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

51 patients assigned PEFG and 46 assigned gemcitabine alone had disease progression. 49 patients in the PEFG group and 46 in the gemcitabine group died from progressive disease. More patients allocated PEFG than gemcitabine alone were alive without progressive disease at 4 months (60% [95% CI 46-72] vs 28% [17-42]; hazard ratio [HR] 0.46 [0.26-0.79]). 1-year overall survival in the PEFG group was 38.5% (25.3-51.7) and in the gemcitabine group was 21.3% (9.6-33.0; HR 0.68 [0.42-1.09]). More patients assigned PEFG showed disease response than did those assigned gemcitabine (38.5% [25.3-51.7] vs 8.5% [0.5-16.5]; odds ratio 6.60 [2.11-20.60], p=0.0008). More patients in the PEFG group had grade 3-4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia than in the gemcitabine group (p<0.0001).

INTERPRETATION

The PEFG regimen could be considered for treatment of advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: Past, present, and future

Advanced pancreatic cancer is a devastating illness characterized by significant morbidity and a brief median survival. Although standard chemotherapy with gemcitabine achieves only modest improvements in survival and quality of life, classic cytotoxic agents, such as 5-fluorouracil, pemetrexed, irinotecan, exatecan, cisplatin, or oxaliplatin, given alone or in combination with gemcitabine, have not proved superior. Thus, more recent trials have focused on targeting the biologic characteristics of pancreatic cancer. Although phase III trials of farnesyl transferase and matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors have not improved survival, encouraging preliminary results have been observed in phase II studies of inhibitors of the vascular endothelial growth factor and the epidermal growth factor receptor.

Phase II clinical trial of 5-fluorouracil, trimetrexate, and leucovorin (NFL) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Advanced pancreatic cancer has limited treatment options. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is frequently used in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Preclinical studies suggest synergism between trimetrexate (TMTX),5-FU, and leucovorin (NFL).

AIM

We conducted a phase II trial to evaluate the activity and safety of NFL in pancreatic cancer.

METHOD

Eligible patients (n = 21) with untreated advanced pancreatic cancer were treated with 110 mg/m2 intravenous (IV) THTX on day 1 and 200 mg/m2 IV leucovorin prior to 500 mg/m2 IV 5-FU on day 2. Oral leucovorin (15 mg every 6 h for seven doses) started intravenous 24 h later.

RESULTS

Treatment was administered for 6 wk followed by a 2-wk rest period. Response was evaluated every 8 wk. All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Most patients (80%) had distant metastases. Forty-five cycles of chemotherapy were administered. The most common serious toxicities were Grade 3 diarrhea (23.8%) and nausea and vomiting (14.2%). The response rate was 4.1% (95% CI, 0-23%), median survival was 6.8 mo, and 1-yr survival was 19%.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with NFL is well-tolerated in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The median survival and 1-yr survival in these patients with poor prognosis compares favorably with other treatment options.

Salvage chemotherapy with mitomycin, docetaxel, and irinotecan (MDI regimen) in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase I and II trial

BACKGROUND

This study evaluates the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and activity of mitomycin, docetaxel, and irinotecan (MDI) regimen on metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, previously treated with gemcitabine-containing chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with less than 76 years, Karnofsky performance status > or = 60, and adequate bone marrow, kidney, and liver function were eligible for this trial. Treatment consisted of mitomycin 6 mg/m2 day 1, docetaxel and irinotecan on days 2 and 8 with escalating doses, every 4 weeks. Dose levels were level 1:30 and 70 mg/m2; level 2:30 and 100 mg/m2; level 3:30 and 85 mg/m2; and level 4:35 and 85 mg/m2. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 4 neutropenia > 7 days, febrile neutropenia, grade 4 thrombocytopenia, nausea and vomiting, or diarrhea, grade > or = 3 nonhematological toxicity, or failure to recover to grade < or = 1 toxicity by day 43, occurring during the first cycle of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

Between September 2001 and October 2002, 15 eligible patients, three of whom had been previously treated with two lines of chemotherapy, received 33 cycles of MDI. Toxicity consisted of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia in 23% of cycles, fatigue, diarrhea, and vomiting in 10% of cycles, and one toxic death. DLT was observed in 2 of 6 level 2 patients (one toxic death and one grade 3 fatigue), and 2 of 3 level 4 patients (one neutropenic fever and one grade 3 fatigue). Thirteen patients were assessable for response. No objective response was observed among patients treated with MTD or higher doses. Three patients had stable disease; all other patients had progressive disease. The median time to tumor progression and median survival was 1.7 and 6.1 months, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The MTD was mitomycin 6 mg/m2 day one, and docetaxel 30 and irinotecan 85 mg/m2 days 2 and 8. This regimen is inactive in metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation: a phase I trial of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil for advanced pancreatic/gastrointestinal malignancies

The authors developed a strategy that includes a novel approach of induction full-dose chemotherapy followed by traditional chemoradiation as a neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. Here they report the results of a phase I/II trial of gemcitabine, cisplatin, and 5-FU for patients with advanced gastrointestinal malignancies.

Pilot study of celecoxib and infusional 5-fluorouracil as second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Cyclooxygenase-2 (COX-2) is up-regulated frequently and may constitute a promising therapeutic target in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Patients with advanced PDAC who had progressive disease after gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were eligible for this pilot study. Treatment was comprised of oral celecoxib (400 mg twice daily) and protracted intravenous (i.v.) infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) (200 mg/m(2) per day), both given continuously for a maximum of 9 treatment months, in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were examined weekly for toxicity and were restaged every 6-8 weeks for tumor assessment.

RESULTS

Seventeen patients entered the study. Asymptomatic transaminase elevation was the most common toxicity and reached NCI-CTC (version 3.0) Grade 3-4 in 4 of 133 treatment weeks. No other hematologic or nonhematologic toxicity > Grade 2 was observed. Four patients discontinued celecoxib due to upper gastrointestinal tract toxicity. Two confirmed partial responses (durations of 23 weeks and 68 weeks, respectively) and 2 patients with stable disease (durations of 10 weeks and 13 weeks, respectively) were observed for an overall response rate of 12% (95% confidence interval, 0-27%) in the intent-to-treat population. A significant decrease (> or = 50%) in serum CA 19.9 levels was observed in 3 of 9 evaluable patients. The median time to disease progression was 8 weeks, and the median overall survival was 15 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of oral celecoxib and 5-FU by protracted i.v. infusion was found to be feasible and well tolerated, and was capable of inducing durable objective responses, even in patients with far advanced, gemcitabine-resistant/refractory PDAC. Further exploration of COX-2 inhibitor/fluropyrimidine combinations is warranted.

Phase I dose-finding study of biweekly irinotecan in combination with fixed doses of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, gemcitabine and cisplatin (G-FLIP) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer or other solid tumors

This phase I trial was initiated based on encouraging clinical data with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV), gemcitabine and cisplatin (G-FLIP) in the therapy of solid tumors. In this trial, G-FLIP has been modified to facilitate outpatient administration and to optimize sequence-dependent synergistic activity. Treatment consisted of biweekly (once every 14 days) cycles of sequential gemcitabine 500 mg/m, irinotecan per dose escalation schedule, bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m and LV 300 mg on day 1 followed by a 24-h 5-FU infusion 1500 mg/m, followed by cisplatin 35 mg/m on day 2. The irinotecan starting dose was 80 mg/m and escalated by 20 mg/m in cohorts of three patients until the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined. Twenty-three patients were enrolled (13 men/10 women) with the following cancers: 11 pancreatic, five gallbladder, three squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, one hepatocellular carcinoma, one melanoma, one gastric, and one breast cancer. Median patient age was 63 years (range 44-78) and median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was 80. Patients received a median of 8 cycles (range 1-16) over five irinotecan dose levels (80, 100, 120, 140 and 160 mg/m). Dose-limiting toxicity consisting of grade 3 nausea/vomiting despite aggressive anti-emetic therapy occurred in one patient at dose level 1 and three patients at dose level 3. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicities per patient consisted of thrombocytopenia (3%), anemia (6%), thrombosis (23%), neutropenia (16%) and neutropenic fever (10%). Of 18 patients evaluable for response, one complete response (pancreatic) and eight partial responses (three gallbladder, two pancreatic, two head and neck, and one breast) were attained. Seven patients had disease stabilization (five pancreatic, one hepatocellular and one gastric) for a median of 16 weeks (range 10-22). Median time to disease progression among all 23 patients enrolled to the phase I portion of the trial was 20.5 weeks (range 4-37). We conclude that G-FLIP is a novel outpatient chemotherapy regimen with acceptable toxicity at the maximum tolerated irinotecan dose of 120 mg/m. The phase II trial of G-FLIP using an irinotecan dose of 120 mg/m for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer is ongoing.

Old and new drugs in systemic therapy of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pancreatic cancer nearly equals its death rate (97%). Two-year survival is about 10%. Chemotherapy treatment is problematic because of the palliative and limited duration of response.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The article analyzes the objective response and median survival time (MST) for old and new drugs in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

The most encouraging results to date come from studies of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) as an adjuvant therapy and of gemcitabine in the advanced disease, which is one of the most active and best tolerated drugs in recent years. However, with the introduction of new drugs or with different old drug associations, interesting results are also becoming evident.

CONCLUSIONS

New approaches to CT treatment are necessary. Patient enrollment into rigorous and well conducted clinical trials, either at tumor diagnosis or after tumor recurrence, will generate new information regarding investigational therapies and it will offer improved therapies for patients with this disease.

Advanced pancreatic cancer: is there a role for combination therapy?

Once thought to be a relatively untreatable disease, pancreatic cancer has recently become a focus of intense clinical research. The systemic administration of gemcitabine (Gemzar) is currently considered the standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced disease. While treatment with gemcitabine has been shown to result in both clinical benefit and prolongation of survival, objective tumor responses are relatively uncommon and median survival times remain short. Several recent efforts have therefore focused on evaluating chemotherapy regimens in which gemcitabine is combined with other cytotoxic drugs. While randomized trials have now confirmed that such combinations are associated with higher response rates, they have not yet clearly demonstrated that combination therapy results in a survival advantage. Increasingly, attention has turned to a number of novel chemotherapeutic and biologic agents that appear promising and are likely to play an important future role in the treatment of patients with this disease.

Review article: chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is a common, highly lethal disease that is rising in incidence. Chemotherapy based on 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) has been shown to prolong survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. Gemcitabine improves major symptoms and survival outcomes compared with bolus 5-FU. Many novel small molecules are being widely and actively researched. These compounds are based on classical mechanisms of action as well as biological therapies targeting novel cellular survival pathways, and include fluoropyrimidines, nucleoside cytidine analogues, platinum analogues, topoisomerase-inhibitors, antimicrotubule agents, proteasome inhibitors, vitamin D analogues, arachidonic acid pathway inhibitors, histone deacytylator inhibitors, farnesyltransferase inhibitors and epidermal growth factor receptor therapies. Adjuvant chemotherapy has also demonstrated the best survival outcomes following resection compared to other adjuvant or neo-adjuvant strategies such as radiation-based treatments. These benefits are superimposed on the dramatic increase in resectability rates and reduction in post-operative mortality achieved by centralisation of treatment in high-volume speciality centres. Newer 'small-molecule' drugs as well as the latest 'large-molecule' biological agents hold considerable promise for the future. Real advances are anticipated over the next five years but are dependent on large randomised controlled trials for success.

Should patients with locally advanced, non-metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas be irradiated?

A small number of patients exist with carcinoma of the pancreas with an inoperable but not metastasized tumor. Prospective randomized studies defined the standard of combined radiochemotherapy during the early 1980s for these patients. Since then, new drugs have shown considerable activity and in parallel improvements in radiotherapy treatment planning and delivery have been achieved. Therefore, it is time to ask whether patients with locally advanced, inoperable pancreatic cancer without metastases should still be irradiated or not. This review summarizes the current literature on combined radiochemotherapy for locally advanced carcinoma of the pancreas. Median survival times of 10-11 months and 1-year survival rates of about 40% can be achieved with modern radiochemotherapy regimens.

The medical management of pancreatic cancer: a review

Pancreatic carcinoma is a commonly occurring cancer that tends to present late in its course when potentially curative surgical treatment is not possible. The majority of patients are, therefore, candidates for systemic therapy. We review the patient and disease-related factors that contribute to the difficulties in the medical management of this condition and discuss new methods of assessing response to treatment, including the introduction of more clinically relevant novel end points such as clinical benefit response. We review the current trial literature examining the use of conventional cytotoxic agents in this disease, both as single agents and in combination. We also review the use of more novel targeted agents and examine their potential utility in this disease. The use of the farnesyl transferase inhibitors, matrix metalloproteinase inhibitors, epidermal growth factor receptor antagonists, and angiogenesis inhibitors is discussed.

A phase II study of mitomycin C, cisplatin and protracted infusional 5-fluorouracil in advanced pancreatic carcinoma: efficacy and low toxicity

BACKGROUND

The effective treatment of unresectable pancreatic carcinoma represents a formidable challenge. There is a need to develop systemic therapies which combine efficacy with acceptable toxicity. The current 'gold standard' gemcitabine gives an objective response rate of the order of 20% and median survival up to 6 months. Here we have evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of mitomycin C, cisplatin and protracted infusional 5-fluorouracil (MCF).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Forty-five patients with locally advanced (13 patients) or metastatic (32 patients) pancreatic carcinoma were treated with mitomycin C 7 mg/m(2) 6 weekly, cisplatin 60 mg/m(2) 3 weekly and protracted venous infusion 5-FU 300 mg/m(2)/day. Patients were evaluated for response after three cycles and received six cycles in total in the absence of progressive disease or poor tolerance. Median age was 62 (45-75) years; 41 patients were World Health Organization performance status 0-1.

RESULTS

Treatment was well tolerated with 36 (84%) patients completing three or more cycles. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were uncommon: anaemia in three patients (7%), mucositis in two (5%), nausea and vomiting in three (7%) and diarrhoea in one (1%). An objective response was seen in 21 (46%) patients. There was one complete response. The median survival overall was 7.1 months and 10.5 months in responders. The median duration of response was 4.3 months. One-year survival was 29%, 2-year survival was 18%.

CONCLUSIONS

MCF combines efficacy with low toxicity in the treatment of advanced pancreatic carcinoma. The efficacy is at least comparable and may be superior to single-agent gemcitabine and MCF may therefore provide a cost-effective alternative.

Metastatic pancreatic cancer: emerging strategies in chemotherapy and palliative care

This update is devoted to discussion of optimal supportive and palliative care of patients with pancreatic cancer. Approximately 33,000 new cases of pancreatic cancer are predicted for the U.S. in 2002. Because diagnosis and intervention occur late in the course of this disease, the vast majority of patients already have metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. These tumors are relatively resistant to systemic chemotherapy, making pancreatic cancer the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in the U.S. and the Western world. For these reasons, efforts at identifying and treating disease-related symptomatology are priorities. This update overviews symptom management, supportive care strategies, and both standard and emerging palliative chemotherapy options. The incorporation of molecularly targeted therapies into treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer is reviewed as well. These strategies are of relevance to internists, gastroenterologists, oncologists, and other specialists who care for patients with pancreatic cancer.