Poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma of the pancreas responsive to combination therapy with gemcitabine and S-1

New Therapy Options for Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of the Pancreas—The Emergent Substance GP-2250 and Gemcitabine Prove to Be Highly Effective without the Development of Secondary Resistances In Vitro and In Vivo

Simple Summary

Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the pancreas is a highly aggressive form of neuroendocrine tumor associated with poor survival and increasing occurrence. GP-2250 is an emergent substance showing antineoplastic properties, especially in combination with Gemcitabine. This study was the first to evaluate the antineoplastic effects of GP-2250 on pancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma. The combination of GP-2250 and Gemcitabine showed highly synergistic effects in a cell culture model, as well as in mice, without the development of secondary resistances. These findings form the basis for further clinical evaluation of a highly promising combination therapy.

Abstract

Neuroendocrine carcinoma of the pancreas (pNEC) is an aggressive form of neuroendocrine tumor characterized by a rising incidence without an increase in survival rates. GP-2250 is an oxathiazinane derivate possessing antineoplastic effects, especially in combination with Gemcitabine on the pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The cytotoxic effects of the monotherapy of GP-2250 (GP-2250_mono) and Gemcitabine (Gem_mono), as well as the combination therapy of both, were studied in vitro using an MTT-assay on the QGP-1 and BON-1 cell lines, along with in vivo studies on a murine xenograft model of QGP-1 and a patient-derived xenograft model (PDX) of Bo99. In vitro, Gem_mono and GP-2250_mono showed a dose-dependent cytotoxicity. The combination of GP-2250 and Gemcitabine exhibited highly synergistic effects. In vivo, the combination therapy obtained a partial response in QGP-1, while GP-2250_mono and Gem_mono showed progressive disease or stable disease, respectively. In Bo99 PDX, the combination therapy led to a partial response, while the monotherapy resulted in progressive disease. No development of secondary resistances was observed, as opposed to monotherapy. This study was the first to evaluate the effects of the emerging substance GP-2250 on pNEC. The substance showed synergism in combination with Gemcitabine. The combination therapy proved to be effective in vitro and in vivo, without the development of secondary resistances.

A case report of mixed acinar-endocrine carcinoma of the pancreas treated with S-1 chemotherapy: Does it work or induce endocrine differentiation?

RATIONALE

Acinar cell carcinomas (ACCs) and mixed acinar-endocrine carcinomas (MAECs) of the pancreas are rare, accounting for only 1% of pancreatic tumors. Although both typically present at an advanced stage, chemotherapeutic regimes have not yet been standardized.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 65-year-old man presented with a large mass in the pancreatic tail with multiple liver metastases.

DIAGNOSIS, INTERVENTIONS, OUTCOMES

He was initially treated with gemcitabine for suspected ductal carcinoma of the pancreas, but no response was observed. S-1, administered as second-line chemotherapy, showed an approximately 38% reduction in the size of the primary tumor and metastatic deposits with therapeutic effects being maintained for 12 months. When the tumor progressed again, he underwent a percutaneous liver biopsy, which led to the diagnosis of MAEC. Combination therapy with cisplatin and etoposide targeting the endocrine component was administered, and this was based on the endocrine component potentially being less sensitive to S-1 than the ACC element. However, therapy was stopped due to the development of neutropenia, and the patient is currently receiving best supportive care.

LESSONS

Given the previous studies suggested that S-1 is more effective for ACCs than gemcitabine, MAECs may also respond to S-1 chemotherapy, similar to ACCs. Another potential interpretation is that S-1 was effective when the condition was ACC, and eventually showed decreased effectiveness when the condition shifted to MAEC. Future studies are needed to conclude whether S-1 chemotherapy truly works against MAECs or induces endocrine differentiation in ACCs as a part of the drug-resistance process.

Long-Term Efficacy of S-1 Chemotherapy plus Administration of Octreotide for a Patient with Metastatic Neuroendocrine Tumor (Gastrinoma)

Metastatic neuroendocrine tumors (gastrinomas) have a poor prognosis. Octreotide can reduce gastrin levels and alleviate hormonal symptoms, and possibly slow tumor growth as well. No drugs were available except streptozocin for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET) in 2008. We report a case of PNET in a 53-year-old woman with multiple liver tumors treated with S-1 plus octreotide. After 6 months from the initiation of the treatment, the pancreatic tumor and liver metastases regressed, and the patient achieved partial response without the development of any serious adverse event. For more than 8 years, the patient has remained asymptomatic without disease progression and is continuing treatment with octreotide and S-1. A marked suppression of gastrin levels has also been achieved. Combination therapy with octreotide and S-1 has been effective and well tolerated in patients with metastatic gastrinoma.

Pancreatic body adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine tumor characteristics: A case report

A 61-year-old female with pancreatic body cancer underwent a distal pancreatectomy. The tumor was a moderately- to poorly-differentiated adenocarcinoma. Tumor growth filled the dilated main pancreatic duct (MPD) and infiltrated the surrounding area. Six months later, metastases to the left diaphragm and MPD of the remnant pancreatic head were detected. Chemoradiotherapy was administered, but the patient succumbed 22 months after surgery. An autopsy demonstrated that a moderately- to poorly-differentiated adenocarcinoma had arisen from the pancreatic head and infiltrated the duodenum and bile duct. Huge liver metastases and multiple peritoneal disseminations were also present. Microscopically, a portion of the tumor had a pseudo-rosette appearance in the adenocarcinoma component, while another section showed characteristics of a neuroendocrine tumor (NET) immunohistochemically. The original surgically-resected tumor also showed NET characteristics immunohistochemically. It is therefore necessary to search for NET components in pancreatic cancer with atypical growth and metastases, even when adenocarcinoma has been diagnosed histologically.