scholarly journals Systemic Therapy for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (11) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas J. Ettrich ◽  
Thomas Seufferlein
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
First Line Treatment

Opinion statementPancreatic cancer is mainly diagnosed at an advanced, often metastatic stage and still has a poor prognosis. Over the last decades, chemotherapy of metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPDAC) has proven to be superior to a mere supportive treatment with respect to both survival and quality of life. Recently, even sequential treatment of mPDAC could be established. Options for first-line treatment are combination chemotherapy regimens such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel when the performance status of the patient is good. For patients with poorer performance status, gemcitabine single-agent treatment is a valid option. Recently, the PARP inhibitor olaparib has been demonstrated to improve progression-free survival when used as a maintenance treatment in the subgroup of patients with mPDAC and a BRCA1/-2 germ line mutation having received at least 16 weeks of platinum-based chemotherapy. This group of patients also benefits from platinum-based chemotherapy combinations. Therefore, the BRCA1/-2 stats should be examined early in patients with mPDAC even when the occurrence of these mutations is only about 5% in the general Caucasian population. After the failure of first-line treatment, patients should be offered a second-line treatment if their ECOG permits further treatment. Here, the combination of 5-FU/FA plus nanoliposomal irinotecan has shown to be superior to 5-FU/FA alone with respect to overall survival. Immune checkpoint inhibitors like PD1/PD-L1 mAbs are particularly efficacious in tumors with high microsatellite instability (MSI-h). Limited data in mPDACs shows that only a part of the already small subgroup of MSI-H mPDACs (frequency about 1%) appears to benefit substantially from a checkpoint inhibitor treatment. The identification of further subgroups, e.g., tumors with DNA damage repair deficiency, gene fusions, as well as novel approaches such as tumor-organoid-informed treatment decisions, may further improve therapeutic efficacy.

Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine and cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a performance status (PS) 2: CAPPA-2 study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8066-8066
Author(s):  
Alessandro Morabito ◽  
Vittorio Gebbia ◽  
Saverio Cinieri ◽  
Maria Grazia Viganò ◽  
Roberto Bianco ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy ◽  
Nsclc Patients ◽  
First Line Treatment

8066 Background: Platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) is the standard treatment for patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC, but the evidence of its efficacy among ECOG PS2 pts is weak, because these pts are usually excluded from clinical trials; concern exists about tolerability and feasibility of standard CT in these pts. No prospective randomized trial has tested the addition of cisplatin to single-agent CT in pts with advanced NSCLC and PS2. Methods: CAPPA-2 was a multicentre, randomized phase III study for first-line treatment of PS2 pts with advanced NSCLC. Patients, aged 18-70, were eligible if they had stage IV or IIIB with malignant pleural effusion or metastatic supraclavicular nodes (TNM VI ed.) and adequate organ function. Patients in standard arm received gemcitabine 1,200 mg/m2 dd1 and 8.Patients in experimental arm received cispaltin 60 mg/m2 d1 plus gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 dd1 and 8. All treatments were repeated q3w, up to 4 cycles, unless disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). To have 80% power of detecting hazard ratio (HR) 0.71, corresponding to an increase in median OS from 4.8 to 6.8 months, 285 deaths were required. Results: The study was stopped in June 2012 after the enrolment of 57 pts, due to the slow accrual and the report of positive results from a similar study. Median OS was 3.0 months with single-agent gemcitabine and 5.9 months with cisplatin + gemcitabine (HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.28-0.98, p=0.039). Combination CT produced longer PFS (median 1.7 vs. 3.3 months, HR 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.89, p=0.017) and higher response rate (4% vs. 18%, p=0.19), without substantial increase in toxicity. Conclusions: Addition of cisplatin to single-agent gemcitabine improves survival as first-line treatment of PS2 patients with advanced NSCLC. Clinical trial information: NCT00526643.

PD-1 antibody combined with paclitaxel (albumin bound) and gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4665-TPS4665
Author(s):  
Jiujie Cui ◽  
Jiayu Yao ◽  
Yu Wang ◽  
Yiyi Liang ◽  
Yongchao Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Tumor Therapy ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

TPS4665 Background: Pancreatic cancer is a malignant tumor with limited therapeutic strategies and poor prognosis. About 60% of the patients have metastasis disease at time of diagnosis and lose the opportunity for surgery. Thus, therapy based on drugs becomes a vital part in pancreatic cancer. In 2013, MPACT showed that albumin-bound paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine in the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer could increase the mOS from 6.6 months to 8.7 months (HR = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.62-0.83; P < 0.001). Nowadays, the immunosuppressive checkpoint inhibitors acting on PD-1/PD-L1 pathway have shown a significant efficacy in enhancing tumor immune surveillance and anti-tumor immune response. In 2018, two studies reported in ASCO showed the preliminary efficacy of albumin paclitaxel, gemcitabine and PD-1 inhibitor in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Among patients who have not received treatment before, the disease control rate was even up to 100%. Therefore, this study will further explore the domestic PD-1 antibody combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel and gemcitabine as the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer among Chinese pancreatic cancer patients. Methods: This is a prospective, single-armed, exploratory, investigator initiated trial to explore the efficacy and safety of PD-1 antibody combined with albumin-bound paclitaxel and gemcitabine as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. This study is, to our knowledge, the first one to test the efficacy and safety of PD-1 antibody on metastatic pancreatic cancer patients among Chinese population. Survival index is median survival estimated by Kaplan-Meier and draw the survival curve. The response rate was compared by χ 2 test / Fisher test. All primary and secondary outcomes will be analyzed on the full analysis set. PD-1 antibody, 200mg, D1 administration; paclitaxel (albumin binding type), 125mg/m2, D1, 8 days administration; gemcitabine, 1000mg/m2, D1, 8 days administration, every 21 days as a cycle and PD-1 antibody (200mg, D1, every 21 days) single drug maintenance treatment is given after the completion of 6 cycle chemotherapy. Major eligibility criteria is that each participant must have metastatic pancreatic cancer confirmed by histology or cytology and has never received systemic anti-tumor therapy before. So far, 11 of planned 20 patients have been enrolled. Clinical trial information: NCT04181645 .

A phase II study of lapatinib and capecitabine in first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (ICORG 08- 39).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 315-315 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. S. McDermott ◽  
P. Calvert ◽  
M. Parker ◽  
G. Webb ◽  
B. Moulton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Survival Duration ◽  
Synergistic Activity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Treatment

315 Background: The combination of capecitabine plus erlotinib in gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer patients has proved beneficial in terms of median survival duration, objective radiological response rate and decrease in tumour marker levels from baseline. In the phase I study of capecitabine and lapatinib carried out in advanced solid tumors, the optimal tolerated regimen was determined to be lapatinib 1,250 mg plus capecitabine 2,000 mg/m2/day. At these dose levels, the combination was well tolerated with few grade 3 toxicities and no grade 4 toxicity. Our preclinical work suggested synergistic activity of capecitabine and lapatinib in pancreatic cancer. We initiated a study of this combination in the first-line therapy of metastatic pancreas cancer. Methods: This was a single-arm multicenter study in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic pancreatic cancer. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The study was designed as a Simons two-stage optimal design and was divided into two stages. The first stage was to recruit up to 12 patients. If at least seven of these patients survived for at least six months, then a further 20 patients would be enrolled into the study. If six or fewer of the initial 12 patients met the specified study survival criteria, the study would be halted. Treatment was to be administered until disease progression or until withdrawal from the study due to unacceptable toxicity or other reasons. Clinical and laboratory parameters were assessed to evaluate disease response and toxicity of therapy. The study patients received lapatinib 1,250 mg/day, plus capecitabine 2000 mg/m2/day on days 1-14 every 21 days. Results: Nine patients were enrolled. Seven of these patients did not achieve the interim protocol response requirement of survival for at least 6 months, to allow for the study to continue to the second cohort of patients. Median overall survival from first dose was 4 months. Median time on treatment was 2 months. There were no objective responses. There were no unexpected toxicities. Conclusions: The addition of lapatinib to capecitabine does not improve overall survival in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer patients. [Table: see text]

Phase II study of bortezomib with cisplatin as first-line treatment of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM): EORTC 08052.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7081-7081 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mary O'Brien ◽  
Rabab Mohamed Gaafar ◽  
Sanjaykumar Popat ◽  
Francesco Grossi ◽  
Allan Price ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Ii Studies ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

7081 Background: Cisplatin is one of the most active drugs available in MPM while bortezomib has shown some activity in single agent phase II studies against MPM. This was a prospective phase II study of cisplatin and bortezomib (CB) in the first line treatment of MPM. Methods: Patients with histological proven MPM, with performance status (PS) 0/1, were eligible. The doses were cisplatin 75mg/m2 /3 wks and bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 day 1, 4, 8, 11 every 3 wks. The primary end-point was progression free survival rate at 18 wks (PFSR=18). The 2-stage Simon design (a=0.1; b = 0.05, P0=0.50 and P1=0.675) was used. In the first step of the study 37 eligible patients were planned. If more than 19 patients were alive and free of progression at 18 wks the total sample size was increased to 76 eligible patients. Results: Between 2007 and 2010 82 patients were entered. The median follow-up time is 32.3 months The median age was 55 years (range: 22-77yrs), male/female: 55/27 , PS 0/1: 9/73, Stage T1: 10%; T2: 42%, T3: 25%; T4: 23% and N0: 57%; N1: 4%; N2: 33%; N3: 6%. The median number of cycles received was 4 and 38% received 6 cycles. Cisplatin/ bortezomib dose intensity was 98/ 80%. Toxicity (grade 3/4): neutropenia 10%, thrombocytopenia 11%, anaemia 1%. Grade 3-4 hyponatraemia/ hypokalaemia occurred in 46/ and 17%. Grade 2 tinnitus, grade 3 fatigue occurred in 16%, and 12%, of patients. Motor/sensory/other neurotoxicity was grade 1: 6/28/7%, grade 2: 2/26/2% and grade 3: 1/7/2% respectively. There were 2 toxic deaths at 32 and 74 days due to acute pneumonitis and cardiac arrest. The PFRS-18 (including symptomatic progression) was 53% (80% confidence intervals, CI, 42-64%). The overall survival was 13.5 months (95% CI 10.5-15) with 56% (95% CI 44-66%) alive at 1 year. The PFS was 5.1 months (95% CI 3.3-6.5). Conclusions: On the basis of the PFRS-18, the null hypothesis could not be rejected, although CB gave predictable toxicity and was as active as other reported regimens in MPM.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document