Surrogacy of Recurrence-free Survival for Overall Survival as an Endpoint of Clinical Trials of Perioperative Adjuvant Therapy in Hepatobiliary-pancreatic Cancers: A Retrospective Study and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the correlation between recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in the hepatobiliary-pancreatic (HBP) surgical setting to validate RFS as a surrogate endpoint.

BACKGROUND

Reliable surrogate endpoints for OS are still limited in the field of HBP surgery.

METHODS

We analyzed patients who underwent curative resection for HBP disease [986 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), 1168 with biliary tract cancer (BTC), 1043 with hepatocellular carcinoma, and 1071 with colorectal liver metastasis] from September 2002 to June 2022. We also conducted meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy to validate the surrogacy in PDAC and BTC.

RESULTS

Correlation coefficients between RFS and OS were low for hepatocellular carcinoma ( p = 0.67) and colorectal liver metastasis ( p = 0.53) but strong for PDAC ( p = 0.80) and BTC ( p = 0.75). In a landmark analysis, the concordance rates between survival or death at 5 years postoperatively and the presence or absence of recurrence at each time point (1, 2, 3, and 4 years) were 50%, 70%, 74%, and 77% for PDAC and 54%, 67%, 73%, and 78% for BTC, respectively, both increasing and reaching a plateau at 3 years. In a meta-analysis, the correlation coefficients for the RFS hazard ratio and OS hazard ratio in PDAC and BTC were p = 0.88 ( P < 0.001) and p = 0.87 ( P < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-year RFS can be a reliable surrogate endpoint for OS in clinical trials of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for PDAC and BTC.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Consensus Statement on Mandatory Measurements for Pancreatic Cancer Trials for Patients With Resectable or Borderline Resectable Disease (COMM-PACT-RB): A Systematic Review and Delphi Consensus Statement

Importance

Pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death; however, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of survival in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer lack mandatory measures for reporting baseline and prognostic factors, which hampers comparisons between outcome measures.

Objective

To develop a consensus on baseline and prognostic factors to be used as mandatory measurements in RCTs of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Evidence Review

We performed a systematic literature search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, and Embase for RCTs on resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with overall survival as the primary outcome. We produced a systematic summary of all baseline and prognostic factors identified in the RCTs. A Delphi panel that included 13 experts was surveyed to reach a consensus on mandatory and recommended baseline and prognostic factors.

Findings

The 42 RCTs that met inclusion criteria reported a total of 60 baseline and 19 prognostic factors. After 2 Delphi rounds, agreement was reached on 50 mandatory baseline and 20 mandatory prognostic factors for future RCTs, with a distinction between studies of neoadjuvant vs adjuvant treatment.

Conclusion and Relevance

This findings of this systematic review and international expert consensus have produced this Consensus Statement on Mandatory Measurements in Pancreatic Cancer Trials for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Disease (COMM-PACT-RB). The baseline and prognostic factors comprising the mandatory measures will facilitate better comparison across RCTs and eventually will enable improved clinical practice among patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Prognosis of Upfront Surgery for Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

The rate of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasing, but upfront resection is still offered to most patients with resectable or borderline resectable disease. Encouraging data reported in adjuvant chemotherapy trials prompts surgeons towards upfront surgery, but such trials are subject to a significant selection bias. This systematic review aims to summarize available high-quality evidence regarding survival of patients treated with upfront surgery for PDAC.

METHODS

Pubmed, Cochrane, and Web of Science Databases were interrogated for prospective studies published between 2000 and 2021 that included at least a cohort of patients treated with upfront surgery for resectable or borderline resectable PDAC. The Cochrane Collaboration's risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB-2) was used to assess risk of bias in all randomized studies. Patient weighted median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, 8,341 abstracts were screened, 17 reports were reviewed in full text, and finally 5 articles and 1 conference abstract underwent data extraction. Included studies were published between 2014 and 2021. All studies were RCTs comparing different neoadjuvant treatment strategies to upfront surgery. Three studies included only resectable PDAC patients, two studies recruited patients with resectable and borderline resectable disease, and one study selected only borderline resectable patients. A total of 439 patients were included in the upfront resection cohorts of the 6 studies, ranging between 20 to 180 patients per study. The weighted median OS after upfront surgery was 18.8 (95% CI 12.4 - 20.6) months. Median DFS was 9 (95% CI 1.6 - 12.5) months. Resection rate was 74.5% (range 65-90%). Adjuvant treatment was initiated in 68% (range 43-77%) of resected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

High-quality data for PDAC patients undergoing upfront surgery is scarce. Meta-analysis from the included studies showed a significantly shorter OS and DFS compared to recently published studies focusing on adjuvant combination chemotherapy, suggesting that the latter may overestimate survival due to the exclusion of most patients scheduled for upfront surgery.

Current Clinical Strategies of Pancreatic Cancer Treatment and Open Molecular Questions

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal malignancies and is associated with a poor prognosis. Surgery is considered the only potential curative treatment for pancreatic cancer, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, but surgery is reserved for the minority of patients with non-metastatic resectable tumors. In the future, neoadjuvant treatment strategies based on molecular testing of tumor biopsies may increase the amount of patients becoming eligible for surgery. In the context of non-metastatic disease, patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma might benefit from neoadjuvant chemo- or chemoradiotherapy followed by surgeryPatients with locally advanced or (oligo-/poly-)metastatic tumors presenting significant response to (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy should undergo surgery if R0 resection seems to be achievable. New immunotherapeutic strategies to induce potent immune response to the tumors and investigation in molecular mechanisms driving tumorigenesis of pancreatic cancer may provide novel therapeutic opportunities in patients with pancreatic carcinoma and help patient selection for optimal treatment.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy has emerged as an alternative treatment strategy for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. In the absence of large randomized controlled trials offering a direct comparison, this study aims to use Markov decision analysis to compare efficacy of traditional surgery first (SF) and neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer.

Methods

An advanced Markov decision analysis model was constructed to compare SF and NAT pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Transition probabilities were calculated from randomized control and Phase II/III trials after comprehensive literature search. Utility outcomes were measured in overall and quality-adjusted life months (QALMs) on an intention-to-treat basis as the primary outcome. Markov cohort analysis of treatment received was the secondary outcome. Model uncertainties were tested with one and two-way deterministic and probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis.

Results

SF gave 23.72 months (18.51 QALMs) versus 20.22 months (16.26 QALMs). Markov Cohort Analysis showed that where all treatment modalities were received NAT gave 35.05 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 30.96 months (24.86QALMs) for R0 resection and 34.08 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 25.85 months (20.72 QALMs) for R1 resection. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that NAT was superior if the resection rate was greater than 51.04% or below 75.68% in SF pathway. Two-way sensitivity analysis showed that pathway superiority depended on obtaining multimodal treatment in either pathway.

Conclusion

Whilst NAT is a viable alternative to traditional SF approach, superior pathway selection depends on the individual patient’s likelihood of receiving multimodal treatment in either pathway.

Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma neo-adjuvant FOLF(IRIN)OX-based chemotherapy - a multicenter, non-comparative, randomized, phase II trial (PANACHE01-PRODIGE48 study)

BACKGROUND

At time of diagnosis, less than 10% of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are considered to be immediately operable (i.e. resectable). Considering their poor overall survival (OS), only tumours without vascular invasion (NCCN 2017) should be considered for resection, i.e. those for which resection with disease-free margins (R0) is theoretically possible in absence of presurgery treatment. With regard to high R1 rates and undetectable locoregional and/or metastatic spreading prior to surgery explain (at least in part) the observed 1-year relapse and mortality rates of 50 and 25%, respectively. Today, upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is the reference treatment in Europe. The main limitation of the adjuvant approach is the low rate of completion of the full therapeutic sequence. Indeed, only 47 to 60% patients received any adjuvant therapy after resection compared to more than 75% for neoadjuvant therapy. No previous prospective study has compared this approach to a neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or FOLFOX chemotherapy for resectable PDAC.

METHODS

PANACHE01-PRODIGE48 is a prospective multicentre controlled randomized non comparative Phase II trial, evaluating the safety and efficacy of two regimens of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (4 cycles of mFOLFIRINOX or FOLFOX) relative to the current reference treatment (surgery and then adjuvant chemotherapy) in patients with resectable PDAC. The main co-primary endpoints are OS rate at 12 months and the rate of patients undergoing the full therapeutic sequence.

DISCUSSION

The "ideal" cancer treatment for resectable PDAC would have the following characteristics: administration to the highest possible proportion of patients, ability to identify fast-progressing patients (i.e. poor candidates for surgery), a low rate of R1 resections (through optimisation of local disease control), and an acceptable toxicity profile. The neoadjuvant approach may meet all these criteria. With respect to published data on the efficacy of FOLFOX and mFOLFIRINOX, these two regimens are potential candidates for neoadjuvant use in the aim to optimising oncological outcomes in resectable PDAC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02959879 . Trial registration date: November 9, 2016.

Stereotactic body radiation therapy plus induction or adjuvant chemotherapy for early stage but medically inoperable pancreatic cancer: A propensity score-matched analysis of a prospectively collected database

Background

To evaluate and compare the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) plus induction chemotherapy and SBRT plus adjuvant therapy.

Methods

Patients with radiographically resectable, biopsy-proven pancreatic cancer were enrolled. Data were prospectively collected from 2012 to 2016. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to identify factors predictive of survival. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to assess the efficacy of SBRT combined with different timing of chemotherapy.

Results

One hundred patients were enrolled with 48 receiving induction chemotherapy and 52 undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy. The median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 17.5 months (95% CI: 15.8–19.2 months) and 13.7 months (95% CI: 12.3–15.1 months), respectively. Patients with adjuvant chemotherapy (P <0.001), CA19-9 response (P <0.001) and BED₁₀ (biological effective dose, α/β = 10) ≥ 60 Gy (P = 0.024) had a longer OS, while the former two correlated with PFS. Patients with more positive factors had a superior OS and PFS. After propensity score matching analysis, there were 23 patients from each group included in the analysis. Longer OS (23.1 months versus 15.6, P <0.001) and PFS (18.0 months versus 11.6 months, P <0.001) were found in patients with adjuvant chemotherapy compared with those with induction chemotherapy.

Conclusion

SBRT was safe and effective in early stage pancreatic cancer. Combined with adjuvant chemotherapy, SBRT could be an alternative for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer but not eligible for surgical resection.

Disease-free survival is not a surrogate endpoint for overall survival in adjuvant trials of pancreatic cancer: a systematic review of randomized trials

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is the standard of care for patients with resected pancreatic cancer (PC). Overall survival (OS) has traditionally represented the primary endpoint in randomized trials assessing adjuvant therapies for PC. The aim of this study was to assess if disease-free survival (DFS) was an adequate surrogate endpoint for OS in randomized trials of adjuvant therapy in PC.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS and Embase, Cochrane Library and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform up to February 2nd, 2017. Surrogacy of DFS with OS was assessed between endpoints and OS through the Spearman rank correlation coefficient, and between the treatment effects on the endpoints using the squared correlation R².

RESULTS

A total of 12 eligible randomized trials that enrolled 4,888 patients where identified for the final analysis. Correlation of DFS with OS was weak at the individual level (Spearman rank correlation coefficient = 0.31) and moderate at the trial level (R² = 0.44).

CONCLUSIONS

DFS does not represent an appropriate surrogate for OS in randomized trials of adjuvant therapy for resected PC. Hence, OS should remain the primary endpoint of future trials evaluating new agents in postsurgical setting.

Optimal adjuvant chemotherapy for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Adjuvant chemotherapy improves survival in patients with resected pancreatic cancer but the optimal regimen remains unclear. We aim to compare all possible adjuvant chemotherapy in terms of overall survival and toxic effects. Pubmed, Trial registries and Cochrane library databases for randomized controlled trials were searched until November 2016. Thirteen trials were included for network analysis and the hazard ratios (HRs) for survival and odds ratios for toxic effects were assessed via Aggregate Data Drug Information System software. Only S-1 chemotherapy improved 1-year, 3-year and 5-year survival compared with observation (HR (95% CI): 3.94 (1.18–12.34); 4.08 (1.58–8.24) and 5.09 (1.16–29.83) respectively). Although not significant, gemcitabine plus uracil/tegafur was associated with poorer 1-year and 3-year survival compared with observation (HR (95% CI): 0.85 (0.16–4.03) and 0.86 (0.23–2.95)). Adding radiation to chemotherapy has no significant improvement in survival. S-1 and gemcitabine plus capecitabine are currently the most effective adjuvant therapies for pancreatic cancer. While S1 has only been validated in Asian people, higher toxicity is an issue for gemcitabine plus capecitabine.

Multimodal treatment of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

After a timing preoperative staging, treatment of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) includes surgery and adjuvant therapies, the former representing the initial therapeutic option and the latter aiming to reduce the incidence of both distant metastases (chemotherapy) and locoregional failures (chemoradiotherapy). Herein, we provide a critical overview on the role of multimodal treatment in PDAC and on new opportunities related to current more active poli-chemotherapy regimens, targeted therapies, and the more recent immunotherapy approaches. Moreover, an analysis of pathological markers and clinical features able to help clinicians in the selection of the best therapeutic strategy will be discussed. Lastly, the role of neoadjuvant treatment of initially resectable disease will be considered mostly in patients whose malignancy shows morphological but not clinical or biological criteria of resectability. Depending on the results of these investigational studies, today a multidisciplinary approach can offer the best address therapy for these patients.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgical strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is gaining acceptance as a valid treatment option for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer; however, its value for clearly resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to use a Markov decision analysis model, in the absence of adequately powered randomized trials, to compare the life expectancy (LE) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of neoadjuvant therapy to conventional upfront surgical strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

A Markov decision model was created to compare two strategies: attempted pancreatic resection followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by restaging with, if appropriate, attempted pancreatic resection. Data obtained through a comprehensive systematic search in PUBMED of the literature from 2000 to 2015 were used to estimate the probabilities used in the model. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 786 potentially eligible studies identified, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria and were used to extract the probabilities used in the model. Base case analyses of the model showed a higher LE (32.2 vs. 26.7 months) and QALE (25.5 vs. 20.8 quality-adjusted life months) for patients in the neoadjuvant therapy arm compared to upfront surgery. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses for LE and QALE revealed that neoadjuvant therapy is favorable in 59% and 60% of the cases respectively.

CONCLUSION(S)

Although conceptual, these data suggest that neoadjuvant therapy offers substantial benefit in LE and QALE for resectable pancreatic cancer patients. These findings highlight the value of further prospective randomized trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy to conventional upfront surgical strategies.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

The timing of surgery and antineoplastic therapies in patients with resectable non-metastatic pancreatic cancer is still a controversial matter of debate, with special regard to neoadjuvant approaches. Following the criteria of the PRISMA statement, a literature search was conducted looking for RCTs focusing on adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapies in resectable pancreatic cancer. The quality of the available evidence was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias. Data extraction was carried out by two independent investigators. The search led to the identification of 2830 papers of which 14 RCTs focusing on adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment of resectable pancreatic cancer eligible for the systematic review. Risk of bias was estimated "unclear" in 3 studies and "high" in 5 studies. Median age ranged between 53 and 66. Overall survival in the surgery-only arms ranged between 11 and 20.2 months; in the adjuvant treatment arms 12.5-29.8 months; and in the neoadjuvant setting 9.9-19.4 months. Neoadjuvant protocols should be offered only in randomized clinical trials comparing the standard of care (surgery followed by adjuvant treatments) to a neoadjuvant approach followed by surgery and adjuvant treatment.

Novel adjuvant therapies for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Contemporary adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer patients following surgical resection includes chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy. However, the median survival remains approximately 20 months despite multi-modality treatment using gemcitabine or fluoropyrimidine systemic chemotherapy. Adjuvant randomized trials are currently underway to evaluate cytotoxic combinations found to be active in advanced disease including FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine/capecitabine. Immunotherapy using genetically engineered cell-based vaccines had shown promise in resected pancreatic cancer patients during early phase trials, and algenpantucel-L vaccine is currently being evaluated in adjuvant setting in a randomized trial. This review focuses on novel adjuvant therapies currently in clinical evaluation.

Desmoplasia and chemoresistance in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) occurs mainly in people older than 50 years of age. Although great strides have been taken in treating PDAC over the past decades its incidence nearly equals its mortality rate and it was quoted as the 4th leading cause of cancer deaths in the U.S. in 2012. This review aims to focus on research models and scientific developments that help to explain the extraordinary resistance of PDAC towards current therapeutic regimens. Furthermore, it highlights the main features of drug resistance including mechanisms promoted by cancer cells or cancer stem cells (CSCs), as well as stromal cells, and the acellular components surrounding the tumor cells—known as peritumoral desmoplasia—that affects intra-tumoral drug delivery. Finally, therapeutic concepts and avenues for future research are suggested, based on the topics discussed.

CA19-9 in potentially resectable pancreatic cancer: perspective to adjust surgical and perioperative therapy

PURPOSE

In pancreatic cancer, genetic markers to aid clinical decision making are still lacking. The present study was designed to determine the prognostic role of perioperative serum tumor marker carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, with a focus on implications for pre- and postoperative therapeutic consequences.

METHODS

Of a total of 1,626 consecutive patients who underwent surgery for primary pancreatic adenocarcinoma, data from 1,543 patients with preoperative serum levels of CA19-9 were evaluated for tumor stage, resectability, and prognosis. Preoperative to postoperative CA19-9 changes were analyzed for long-term survival. A control cohort of 706 patients with chronic pancreatitis was used to assess the predictability of malignancy by CA19-9 and the effects of hyperbilirubinemia on CA19-9 levels.

RESULTS

The more that preoperative CA19-9 increased, the lower were tumor resectability and survival rates. Resectability and 5-year survival varied from 80 to 38 % and from 27 to 0 % for CA19-9 <37 versus ≥4,000 U/ml, respectively. The R0 resection rate was as low as 15 % in all patients with CA19-9 levels ≥1,000 U/ml. CA19-9 increased with the stage of the disease and was highest in AJCC stage IV. Patients with an early postoperative CA19-9 increase had a dismal prognosis. Hyperbilirubinemia did not markedly affect CA19-9 levels (correlation coefficient ≤0.135).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, CA19-9 predicts resectability, stage of disease, as well as survival. Highly elevated preoperative or increasing postoperative CA19-9 levels are associated with low resectability and poor survival rates, and demand the adjustment of surgical and perioperative therapy.

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.