1
|
Irigoyen A, Gallego J, Guillén Ponce C, Vera R, Iranzo V, Ales I, Arévalo S, Pisa A, Martín M, Salud A, Falcó E, Sáenz A, Manzano Mozo JL, Pulido G, Martínez Galán J, Pazo-Cid R, Rivera F, García García T, Serra O, Fernández Parra EM, Hurtado A, Gómez Reina MJ, López Gomez LJ, Martínez Ortega E, Benavides M, Aranda E. Gemcitabine-erlotinib versus gemcitabine-erlotinib-capecitabine in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: Efficacy and safety results of a phase IIb randomised study from the Spanish TTD Collaborative Group. Eur J Cancer 2017; 75:73-82. [PMID: 28222309 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.12.032] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2016] [Revised: 11/30/2016] [Accepted: 12/26/2016] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Gemcitabine and erlotinib have shown a survival benefit in the first-line setting in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). The aim of this study was to assess whether combining capecitabine (C) with gemcitabine + erlotinib (GE) was safe and effective versus GE in patients with mPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Previously untreated mPC patients were randomised to receive G (1000 mg/m2, days 1, 8, 15) + E (100 mg/day, days 1-28) + C (1660 mg/m2, days 1-21) or GE, q4 weeks, until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary end-point: progression-free survival (PFS); secondary end-points: overall survival (OS), response rate, relationship of rash with PFS/OS and safety. RESULTS 120 patients were randomised, median age 63 years, ECOG status 0/1/2 33%/58%/8%; median follow-up 16.5 months. Median PFS in the gemcitabine-erlotinib-capecitabine (GEC) and GE arms was 4.3 and 3.8 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.58-1.31; p = 0.52). Median OS in the GEC and GE arms was 6.8 and 7.7 months, respectively (HR: 1.09, 95% CI: 0.72-1.63; p = 0.69). Grade 3/4 neutropenia (GEC 43% versus GE 15%; p = 0.0008) and mucositis (GEC 9% versus GE 0%; p = 0.03) were the only statistically significant differences in grade 3/4 adverse events. PFS and OS were significantly longer in patients with rash (grade ≥1) versus no rash (grade = 0): PFS 5.5 versus 2.0 months (HR = 0.39, 95% CI: 0.26-0.6; p < 0.0001) and OS: 9.5 versus 4.0 months (HR = 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.77; p = 0.0014). CONCLUSION PFS with GEC was not significantly different to that with GE in patients with mPC. Skin rash strongly predicted erlotinib efficacy. The study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01303029.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Javier Gallego
- General Universitario de Elche Hospital, Alicante, Spain
| | | | | | | | - Inmaculada Ales
- Hospital Regional Universitario y Virgen de la Victoria, Málaga, Spain
| | | | - Aleydis Pisa
- Sabadell Hospital, Corporación Sanitaria Parc Tauli, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Marta Martín
- Santa Creu i Sant Pau Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | - Esther Falcó
- Fundación Son Llatzer Hospital, Palma de Mallorca, Spain
| | | | | | - Gema Pulido
- Maimonides Institute of Biomedical Research (IMIBIC), Reina Sofía Hospital, University of Córdoba, Spanish Cancer Network (RTICC), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Córdoba, Spain
| | | | - Roberto Pazo-Cid
- Aragon Institute of Biomedical Research (IISA), Miguel Servet University Hospital, Spanish Cancer Network (RTICC), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Zaragoza, Spain
| | | | | | - Olbia Serra
- Moisés Broggi Hospital, Institut Català Oncologia - Hospitalet del Llobregat, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Manuel Benavides
- Hospital Regional Universitario y Virgen de la Victoria, Málaga, Spain
| | - Enrique Aranda
- Maimonides Institute of Biomedical Research (IMIBIC), Reina Sofía Hospital, University of Córdoba, Spanish Cancer Network (RTICC), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Córdoba, Spain
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Dose escalation to rash for erlotinib plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: the phase II RACHEL study. Br J Cancer 2014; 111:2067-75. [PMID: 25247318 PMCID: PMC4260026 DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2014.494] [Citation(s) in RCA: 37] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/20/2014] [Revised: 07/24/2014] [Accepted: 08/16/2014] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Background: This phase II, open-label, randomised study evaluated whether patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving erlotinib/gemcitabine derived survival benefits from increasing the erlotinib dose. Methods: After a 4-week run-in period (gemcitabine 1000 mg m−2 once weekly plus erlotinib 100 mg per day), patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who developed grade 0/1 rash were randomised to receive gemcitabine plus erlotinib dose escalation (150 mg, increasing by 50 mg every 2 weeks (maximum 250 mg); n=71) or gemcitabine plus standard-dose erlotinib (100 mg per day; n=75). The primary end point was to determine whether overall survival (OS) was improved by increasing the erlotinib dose. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), incidence of grade ⩾2 rash, and safety. Results: Erlotinib dose escalation induced grade ⩾2 rash in 29 out of 71 (41.4%) patients compared with 7 out of 75 (9.3%) patients on standard dose. Efficacy was not significantly different in the dose-escalation arm compared with the standard-dose arm (OS: median 7.0 vs 8.4 months, respectively, hazard ratio (HR), 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88–1.80; P=0.2026; PFS: median 3.5 vs 4.5 months, respectively, HR, 1.09, 95% CI: 0.77–1.54; P=0.6298). Incidence of adverse events was comparable between randomised arms. Conclusion: The erlotinib dose-escalation strategy induced rash in some patients; there was no evidence that the higher dose translated into increased benefit.
Collapse
|
3
|
Heinemann V, Haas M, Boeck S. Systemic treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Cancer Treat Rev 2012; 38:843-53. [PMID: 22226241 DOI: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2011.12.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 92] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2011] [Revised: 12/09/2011] [Accepted: 12/12/2011] [Indexed: 02/08/2023]
Abstract
Pancreatic cancer belongs to the most malignant gastrointestinal cancers and, in its advanced stage, remains a deadly disease for nearly all affected patients. Treatment of metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas not only involves chemotherapy and targeted therapy, but also requires attention to accompanying comorbidities as well as frequently intensive supportive treatment and psychosocial support. Gemcitabine-based combinations with fluoropyrimidines and platin analogs have essentially failed to provide a substantial prolongation of survival and may constitute a treatment option only in patients with a good performance status. Among targeted therapies, only the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib has shown activity which is marginal in the overall population, but clinically relevant in patients developing skin rash. New avenues of polychemotherapy are presently explored since the gemcitabine-free FOLFIRINOX-regimen (infusional 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin) was shown to be markedly superior to gemcitabine in selected good-performance patients. Pancreatic cancer is notably characterized as a hypovascular tumor rich in desmoplastic stromal tissue. An innovative approach to treatment therefore focuses on peritumoral fibroblasts and aims to induce a depletion of the stroma either by inhibition of the hedgehog pathway or by targeting SPARC (secreted protein acidic and rich in cysteine) via application of albumin-bound paclitaxel.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Volker Heinemann
- Klinikum Grosshadern, Department of Oncology and Comprehensive Cancer Center, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Germany.
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Aranda E, Manzano JL, Rivera F, Galán M, Valladares-Ayerbes M, Pericay C, Safont MJ, Mendez MJ, Irigoyen A, Arrivi A, Sastre J, Díaz-Rubio E. Phase II open-label study of erlotinib in combination with gemcitabine in unresectable and/or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas: relationship between skin rash and survival (Pantar study). Ann Oncol 2011; 23:1919-25. [PMID: 22156621 DOI: 10.1093/annonc/mdr560] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Skin rash is an adverse event which might be associated with longer survival in patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The aim of this nonrandomised phase II clinical trial is to prospectively evaluate the relationship between skin rash and overall survival (OS) in advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with erlotinib plus gemcitabine. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were given gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2/week, 3 weeks every 4 weeks) plus erlotinib (100 mg/day orally continuously) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was OS. RESULTS A total of 153 eligible patients were enrolled (grade≥2 rash, 25%; grade<2 rash, 75%). OS was longer in patients with grade≥2 rash versus grade<2 (11 versus 5 months; P<0.001). Progression-free survival was longer in patients with grade≥2 rash versus grade<2 (6 versus 3 months; P<0.001) and shorter in those without rash versus grade 1 (2 versus 4 months; P=0.005) or grade≥2 (2 versus 6 months; P<0.001). Patients with grade≥2 rash showed higher rates of overall response (21% versus 7%; P<0.05) and disease control (84% versus 43%; P<0.05) versus grade<2. CONCLUSIONS This study prospectively confirms the relationship between rash and longer OS in unresectable locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with erlotinib plus gemcitabine.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Aranda
- Department of Oncology, Hospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Boeck S, Heinemann V. Anti–Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Treatment Strategies in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Success or Failure? J Clin Oncol 2011; 29:e70-1; author reply e72-3. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2010.31.8733] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Stefan Boeck
- Klinikum Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians–University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Volker Heinemann
- Klinikum Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians–University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|