Phase I trial of gefitinib with concurrent radiotherapy and fixed dose-rate gemcitabine infusion, in locally advanced pancreatic cancer

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4105-4105
Author(s):  
J. Maurel ◽  
M. Martin-Richard ◽  
C. Conill ◽  
M. Sanchez ◽  
L. Petriz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Serum Levels ◽  
Helical Computed Tomography ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Carcinoma

4105 Background: Pancreatic cancers are resistant to radiotherapy (RT) and current chemotherapy agents. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is over-expressed in pancreatic cancer and in vitro studies have shown that EGFR inhibitors can overcome radio- and chemo-resistance. The aim of the study was to determine the maximally tolerated dose of gefitinib, in combination with RT and gemcitabine for patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma (LAPC). Methods: Eighteen patients with pathological proven LAPC, due to major vascular invasion based on helical computed tomography and endoscopic ultrasound, were entered. The targeted irradiated volume included the tumor and 2 cm-margin. Prophylactic irradiation of regional nodes was not allowed. Patients with >500 cc of planned tumor volume (PTV) were excluded. An initial cohort of 6 patients was treated with RT (45 Gy/25 fractions/5 weeks) plus concomitant gefitinib (250 mg/day). Successive cohorts of patients received 100, 150 and 200 mg/m2/day of gemcitabine in a 2 hour infusion over weeks 1,2,3,4, and 5 with gefitinib (250 mg/day) and RT. Gefitinib was continued after RT until progression. A pharmacodynamic study of angiogenic markers (VEGF and IL-8) was also performed. Results: Mean PTV was 293cc (range 137–462 cc). There were no dose-limiting toxicities on study. Common toxicities were mild neutropenia, asthenia, diarrhea, cutaneous rash and nausea/vomiting. One patient showed a partial response of 13 months in duration, and 7 patients showed disease stabilization. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 3.7 months and median overall survival (OS) was 7.5 months. No patients have a reduction in VEGF levels >50%. Reduction in VEGF serum levels >25% and IL-8 levels >50% had no impact on PFS and OS. Conclusion: Our results support thatthe combination of gefitinib, RT and gemcitabine showed an acceptable toxicity but with modest activity in LAPC. [Table: see text]

Phase III trial of gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) versus gemcitabine (fixed-dose-rate infusion [FDR]) versus gemcitabine + oxaliplatin (GEMOX) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (E6201)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA4004-LBA4004 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Poplin ◽  
D. E. Levy ◽  
J. Berlin ◽  
M. L. Rothenberg ◽  
P. J. O’Dwyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Response Patterns ◽  
Significance Level

LBA4004 Background: Gemcitabine (GEM) is the cornerstone of treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (PANCA). FDR GEM or GEMOX are promising, but have yet to convincingly demonstrate a survival advantage over GEM alone. E6201 compares overall survival (OS) of standard GEM 1000 mg/m2/30 min wkly ×7 over 56 days then wkly ×3 q28 d (ARM A) vs. FDR GEM 1500 mg/m2/150 min wkly ×3 q28 days (ARM B) or GEM 1000 mg/m2/100-min/d1 + oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2/d2 q14d (ARM C). Secondary endpoints are the comparison of the experimental regimens, toxicity, response, patterns of failure, progression-free survival and quality-of-life. Methods: This multi-institutional trial included patients (pts) with measurable and non-measurable advanced, unresectable PAN CA, normal organ function and PS 0–2. Pts were chemonaive, although prior adjuvant radiosensitizing 5FU was permitted. Pts were stratified by PS 0–1 vs 2 and locally advanced vs metastatic disease The study was designed to detect a 33% difference in median survival (hazard ratio 1.33) with 81% power while maintaining a significance level of 2.5% in a two-sided test for each of the two primary comparisons, assuming exponential failure and median survival of 6 mo for Arm A and 8 mo for Arm B and C (N = 750 eligible). Results: Accrual started in 3/03 and completed in 3/05. Median follow up is 5.8 mo. 833 pts (53% men; 88% PS 0–1; 88% metastatic), were randomized with 280, 277 and 276 pts in Arms A, B and C. The third interim analysis was conducted with 89.5% information on 3/2006. The predominant toxicity, available for 758 pts, was grade 3/4 myelosuppression and fatigue. Two deaths from ARDS and infection occurred. Median OS for ARMS A, B, and C are 4.96, 6.01 and 6.47 months, respectively. Hazard ratio A vs B is 1.21 with stratified log rank of 0.053 and for A vs C is 1.22 with stratified log rank of 0.045, neither statistically significant. Conclusion: E6201 final OS results will be available in June, 2006. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

PANOVA: A pilot study of TTFields concomitant with gemcitabine for front-line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 269-269 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fernando Rivera ◽  
Javier Gallego ◽  
Carmen Guillen ◽  
Manuel Benavides ◽  
Jose A. Lopez-Martin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Electric Fields ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

269 Background: TTFields are alternating electric fields delivered to the region of the tumor by means of non-invasive transducer arrays. TTFields interfere with mitotic spindle formation, thus having an anti-mitotic activity. In pancreatic cancer, TTFields decreased proliferation and clonogenic potential in vitro, and reduced tumor volume in vivo. The PANOVA trial was designed to test TTFields, combined with chemotherapy, in pancreatic cancer. Methods: Twenty patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled in a prospective, single arm study of TTFields at 150 kHz, concomitant with standard weekly gemcitabine. All patients had histologically-confirmed unresectable tumors, with an ECOG performance score of 0-1 and no prior chemotherapy or radiation therapy. The primary endpoint was incidence and severity of treatment emergent adverse events (AEs). Secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), PFS rate at 6 months, overall survival (OS) and response rate. Results: The median age was 73 (range – 49-81) and 60% of the patients were females. Most patients (80%) had an ECOG score of 1. Twelve patients (60%) had distant metastases, while the others had locally advanced disease. Median compliance with TTFields was 78% (14 hours/day), with median duration of 5 months. Fourteen patients (70%) had serious (grade 3-5) AEs during the study period. Six patients (30%) had hematological, 45% gastrointestinal and 15% pulmonary AEs. Ten patients (50%) had treatment-related skin toxicity, of which only 2 were grade 3, both resolved with appropriate treatment. No TTFields-related serious AEs were reported. The median PFS was 8.3 months (95% CI 4.3, 10.3). PFS rate at 6 months was 56%. Of the evaluable tumors, 30% had partial response and another 30% stable disease. The median OS was 14.9 months and 1-year survival rate was 55%. Conclusions: TTFields concomitant to gemcitabine are tolerable and safe for advanced pancreatic cancer patients. The efficacy results are promising and support further research in this indication. An extension of the PANOVA protocol, including 20 additional patients who receive gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel and TTFields is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT01971281.

scholarly journals Failure patterns and outcomes of dose escalation of stereotactic body radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a multicenter cohort study

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. 175883592097715
Author(s):  
Xiaofei Zhu ◽  
Yangsen Cao ◽  
Tingshi Su ◽  
Xixu Zhu ◽  
Xiaoping Ju ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Multicenter Cohort Study ◽  
Failure Patterns ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Prescription Dose ◽  
Contrast Ct

Objective: This study aims to compare recurrence patterns and outcomes of biologically effective dose (BED10, α/β = 10) of 60–70 Gy with those of a BED10 >70 Gy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Methods: Patients from three centers with a biopsy and a radiographically proven LAPC were retrospectively included and data were prospectively collected from June 2012 to June 2019. Radiotherapy was delivered by stereotactic body radiation therapy. Recurrences were categorized as in-field, marginal, and outside-the-field recurrence. Patients in two groups were required to receive abdominal enhanced contrast CT or MRI every 2–3 months and CA19-9 examinations every month during follow-up. Treatment-related toxicities were evaluated every month. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: After propensity score matching, there were 486 patients in each group. The median prescription dose of the two groups was 37 Gy/5–8 f (range: 36–40.8 Gy/5–8 f) and 42 Gy/5–8 f (range: 40–49.6 Gy/5–8 f), respectively. The median OS of patients with a BED10 >70 Gy and a BED10 60–70 Gy was 20.3 months (95% CI: 19.1–21.5 months) and 18.2 months (95% CI: 17.8–18.6 months) respectively ( p < 0.001). The median PFS of the two cohorts was 15.4 months (95% CI: 14.2–16.6 months) and 13.3 months (95% CI: 12.9–13.7 months) respectively ( p < 0.001). A higher incidence of in-field and marginal recurrence was found in patients with BED10 of 60–70 Gy (in-field: 97/486 versus 72/486, p = 0.034; marginal: 109/486 versus 84/486, p = 0.044). However, more patients with BED10 >70 Gy had grade 2 or 3 acute (87/486 versus 64/486, p = 0.042) and late gastrointestinal toxicities (77/486 versus 55/486, p = 0.039) than those with BED10 of 60–70 Gy. Conclusion: BED10 >70 Gy was found to have the best survival benefits along with a higher incidence of acute and late gastrointestinal toxicities. Therefore, a higher dose may be required in the case of patients’ good tolerance.

GOFURTGO trial (GFG): An AGITG multicenter phase II study of fixed dose rate gemcitabine-oxaliplatin (Gem-Ox) integrated with concomitant 5FU and 3-D conformal radiotherapy (5FU-3DRT) for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4616-4616
Author(s):  
D. Goldstein ◽  
G. van Hazel ◽  
S. Selva-Nayagam ◽  
S. Ackland ◽  
J. Shapiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Conformal Radiotherapy ◽  
Disease Stage ◽  
Fixed Dose ◽  
Radiation Toxicity ◽  
Gastric Bleeding ◽  
Regional Lymph Nodes ◽  
Systemic Spread

4616 Background: Our previous study of Gem with sandwich 5FU-3DRT for LAPC was encouraging (Br J Cancer 2007: 97, 464–471). Gem-Ox has higher response rate than Gem, improved progression free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS). Its use in LAPC may improve local control (LC) and delay systemic spread. GFG is a study of induction (ind) Gem-Ox, then 5FU-3DRT, then consolidation (con) Gem-Ox. Primary outcome is feasibility using proportion of patients (pts) receiving > 80% planned dose for each component. Secondary outcomes are safety, activity and QOL. Methods: Pts with previously untreated inoperable LAPC, M0, measurable disease, ECOG 0–2 were given Gem (1000mg/m2 d1 + d15 q28), Ox (100mg/m2 d2 + d16 q28) in both ind (1 cycle) & con (3 cycles), & 5FU 200mg/m2/d over 6 weeks during RT of 54Gy in 30 fractions of 1.8Gy. Results: 48 pts were enrolled, median age 61y (44–81y), PS 0/1=96%, regional lymph nodes=44%, T4=46%. Worst grade (G) for anaemia (10%); fatigue, nausea (8%); diarrhoea, vomiting, neutropenia, infection (4%); stomatitis, anorexia (2%) was G3. Thrombocytopenia was G3=2% G4=2%; liver function was G3=23% G4=6%; late radiation toxicity was G3=2% G4=2% (both gastric bleeding). Half of all pts completed all planned cycles (24 pts); 29% of pts received >80% of all treatment (14 pts); 70% of pts received >80% of all chemoradiation (33 pts). Pts ceased treatment for toxicity (16%), PD (21%) or doctor/pt preference (4/2%). Global QOL did not significantly change from baseline. Median duration of LC, PFS, OS were 15.8, 9.9, 15.4m at median follow up of 29.7m. Exploratory analysis of age, disease stage, PS, CA19–9 or WCC found no univariate predictors of PFS or treatment completion. 8/48 pts survived >24m. Conclusions: Compared to our previous study using the same radiation schedule, addition of oxaliplatin was associated with improved LC, PFS & OS (prev. 11.9, 7.1 & 11.7m) without significant offset by toxicity. The extended duration of LC and a subset who had a very prolonged benefit may be due to patient selection but equally may suggest an incremental benefit from more intensive systemic therapy requiring further study in controlled trials. [Table: see text]

Pharmacodynamic separation (PDS) of gemcitabine (Gem) and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor erlotinib (E) in patients (Pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer: Phase II results.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15073-e15073
Author(s):  
Thomas John Semrad ◽  
Heinz-Josef Lenz ◽  
I-Yeh Gong ◽  
Michael S. Tanaka ◽  
Courtney Eddings ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cell Cycle ◽  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Kinase Inhibitors ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Dose Schedule ◽  
Cycle Phase ◽  
G1 Arrest ◽  
Egfr Tkis

e15073 Background: Continuously dosed E given concurrently with Gem results in only a modest survival improvement in pts with advanced pancreatic cancer. Preclinical data suggest that there is antagonism between chemotherapy and EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) when these are delivered concurrently due to cell cycle effects. Work by our group and others has shown that EGFR TKIs induce cytostasis due to G1 arrest, which reduces subsequent cell cycle phase-dependent activity of chemotherapy. We tested a PDS approach for E + Gem as a means of overcoming the hypothesized negative interaction of EGFR TKIs and chemotherapy. Methods: Pts with measurable, previously untreated locally advanced unresectable/metastatic pancreatic cancer with adequate organ function and PS 0-2 were eligible. Tumor tissue was collected for molecular studies. PDS Regimen: Gem 1000 mg/m2 IV days 1, 8, 15, and E 150 mg/day on days 2-5, 9-12, 16-26 of each 28-day cycle. Primary endpoint was PFS; secondary endpoints included response rate (RR) and safety. To have 80% power at 5% significance, 70 pts were planned to detect an increase of PFS from 3.75 to 5.25 months. The study was terminated due to funding considerations. Results: 30 pts enrolled with median age 67 years (range 46-84); PS: 0 (23%), 1 (47%), and 2 (30%); locally advanced (13%) & metastatic (87%). Median PFS was 2.07 months (95% CI; 1.87 – 5.50 months). Median OS was 5.67 months (95% CI; 2.83 – 11.87 months). Median cycles completed were 2 (range 0-8). Two pts withdrew consent in the first cycle without progression and were not evaluable for response. RR was 11% (3 PRs); DCR was 46%. Grade 3/4 adverse events occurred in 63% of pts; the most common were neutropenia (23%), fatigue (13%), anemia (10%), thrombocytopenia (10%), rash (10%), nausea (10%), and diarrhea (10%). Conclusions: Although Gem and E in a PDS dose-schedule was feasible & tolerable in pts with advanced pancreatic cancer, no signal for increased efficacy was seen (compared to historic controls) in this molecularly unselected cohort. Correlative studies to identify potential molecular biomarkers of benefit are ongoing and will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT00810719.

Phase III Randomized Comparison of Gemcitabine Versus Gemcitabine Plus Capecitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (33) ◽  
pp. 5513-5518 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Cunningham ◽  
Ian Chau ◽  
Deborah D. Stocken ◽  
Juan W. Valle ◽  
David Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label

PurposeBoth gemcitabine (GEM) and fluoropyrimidines are valuable treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. This open-label study was designed to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients randomly assigned to GEM alone or GEM plus capecitabine (GEM-CAP).Patients and MethodsPatients with previously untreated histologically or cytologically proven locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas with a performance status ≤ 2 were recruited. Patients were randomly assigned to GEM or GEM-CAP. The primary outcome measure was survival. Meta-analysis of published studies was also conducted.ResultsBetween May 2002 and January 2005, 533 patients were randomly assigned to GEM (n = 266) and GEM-CAP (n = 267) arms. GEM-CAP significantly improved objective response rate (19.1% v 12.4%; P = .034) and progression-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 0.78; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.93; P = .004) and was associated with a trend toward improved OS (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.02; P = .08) compared with GEM alone. This trend for OS benefit for GEM-CAP was consistent across different prognostic subgroups according to baseline stratification factors (stage and performance status) and remained after adjusting for these stratification factors (P = .077). Moreover, the meta-analysis of two additional studies involving 935 patients showed a significant survival benefit in favor of GEM-CAP (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75 to 0.98; P = .02) with no intertrial heterogeneity.ConclusionOn the basis of our trial and the meta-analysis, GEM-CAP should be considered as one of the standard first-line options in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer.

scholarly journals Effectiveness of Carbon Ion Radiation in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jakob Liermann ◽  
Patrick Naumann ◽  
Fabian Weykamp ◽  
Philipp Hoegen ◽  
Juergen Debus ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Local Control ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Carbon Ion Radiotherapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Carbon Ion

PurposeEffective treatment strategies for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients are eagerly warranted. Recently, convincing oncological outcomes were demonstrated by carbon ion radiotherapy. Nevertheless, there is a lack of evidence for this modern radiation technique due to the limited number of carbon ion facilities worldwide. Here, we analyze feasibility and efficacy of carbon ion radiotherapy in the management of LAPC at Heidelberg Ion Beam Therapy Center (HIT).MethodsBetween 2015 and 2020, 21 LAPC patients were irradiated with carbon ions with a total dose of 48 Gy (RBE) in single doses of 4 Gy (RBE). Three patients (14%) were treated with concomitant chemotherapy with gemcitabine 300 mg/m2 body surface weekly. Toxicity rates were extracted from the charts. Overall survival, progression free survival, local control, and locoregional control were evaluated using Kaplan–Meier estimates.ResultsOne patient developed ascites CTCAE grade III during radiotherapy, which was related to a later histologically confirmed metachronous peritoneal carcinomatosis. No further higher-graded toxicity could be observed. The most common symptoms were nausea and abdominal pain. After a median estimated follow-up time of 19.1 months, the median progression free survival was 3.7 months, and the median overall survival was 11.9 months. The estimated 1-year local control and locoregional control rates were 89 and 84%, respectively.ConclusionCarbon ion radiotherapy of LAPC patients is safely feasible. Local tumor control rates were high. Nevertheless, compared to historical data, an overall survival improvement could not be observed. This could be explained by the poor prognosis of the selected underlying patients that mostly did not respond to prior chemotherapy as well as the early and frequent emergence of distant metastases that demonstrate the necessity of additional chemotherapy in further studies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document