A multicenter, phase IV study of the effectiveness of palliative gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽  
pp. 46-46
Author(s):  
David Wallace ◽  
Jina Zhang-Salomons ◽  
Christopher M. Booth ◽  
William J. Mackillop
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Practice ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Routine Clinical Practice ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Patient Reported

46 Background: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that palliative gemcitabine provides clinical benefit and prolongs survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The purpose of this study was to determine if the efficacy of palliative gemcitabine demonstrated in RCTs has translated into effectiveness in routine clinical practice in Ontario. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients with exocrine cancer of the pancreas treated with first line, single agent, palliative gemcitabine at all 13 provincial cancer centres in Ontario between 2008 and 2011. These patients were identified by linking electronic records of treatment from all cancer centres and hospitals in Ontario to the Ontario Cancer Registry. Patient-reported well-being and symptoms were captured by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, which has been in routine use at these centres since 2008. The effectiveness of gemcitabine was measured in terms of clinical benefit at two months and overall survival. Patients were classified as having achieved clinical benefit if they had not discontinued gemcitabine and their self-reported well-being was stable or improved at two months. Results: The study population included 423 patients. Their median age was 65 and 50% were women. Fifty-seven percent had stage IV disease, 17% had stage III disease, and 10% had recurrence after earlier treatment for stage I or II disease. Patients included in this study were older than, but otherwise similar to, patients enrolled in four relevant RCTs that used gemcitabine in the experimental or control arm. At two months, 36.9% (95% CI 29.6-44.2%) of patients in this study achieved clinical benefit, which was within the range of 24% to 56% observed in patients in these trials. Median overall survival was 5.7 months (95% CI 4.7-6.1), which was within the range of 5.4 to 6.9 months reported in the trials. Conclusions: The efficacy of gemcitabine demonstrated in RCTs has translated into effectiveness in routine clinical practice in Ontario. The approach described above could readily be used to study the effectiveness of other palliative interventions.

scholarly journals Are population‐based patient‐reported outcomes associated with overall survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer?

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 215-224 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wei Fang Dai ◽  
Jaclyn Beca ◽  
Helen Guo ◽  
Wanrudee Isaranawatchai ◽  
Deborah Schwartz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Patient Reported Outcomes ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Patient Reported

Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Tipifarnib Compared With Gemcitabine Plus Placebo in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 1430-1438 ◽  
Author(s):  
E. Van Cutsem ◽  
H. van de Velde ◽  
P. Karasek ◽  
H. Oettle ◽  
W.L. Vervenne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Free Survival

Purpose To determine whether addition of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor tipifarnib (Zarnestra, R115777; Johnson and Johnson Pharmaceutical Research and Development, Beerse, Belgium) to standard gemcitabine therapy improves overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared gemcitabine + tipifarnib versus gemcitabine + placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma previously untreated with systemic therapy. Tipifarnib was given at 200 mg bid orally continuously; gemcitabine was given at 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously weekly × 7 for 8 weeks, then weekly × 3 every 4 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points included 6-month and 1-year survival rates, progression-free survival, response rate, safety, and quality of life. Results Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the two treatment arms. No statistically significant differences in survival parameters were observed. The median overall survival for the experimental arm was 193 v 182 days for the control arm (P = .75); 6-month and 1-year survival rates were 53% and 27% v 49% and 24% for the control arm, respectively; median progression-free survival was 112 v 109 days for the control arm. Ten drug-related deaths were reported for the experimental arm and seven for the control arm. Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia grade ≥ 3 were observed in 40% and 15% in the experimental arm versus 30% and 12% in the control arm. Incidences of nonhematologic adverse events were similar in two groups. Conclusion The combination of gemcitabine and tipifarnib has an acceptable toxicity profile but does not prolong overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer compared with single-agent gemcitabine.

Patient reported abdominal pain as a surrogate of the clinical benefit of tipifarnib in pancreatic cancer patients.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 275-275
Author(s):  
Antonio Gualberto ◽  
Catherine Rose Scholz ◽  
Eric Van Cutsem
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Abdominal Pain ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Study Entry ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Patient Reported

275 Background: Tumor CXCL12 expression identifies patients who may benefit from tipifarnib therapy. In pancreatic cancer, CXCL12 is known to decrease abdominal pain by inducing the migration of pain suppressing Schwann cells to tumor lesions. Given the association between CXCL12 and pain suppression, we investigated whether the absence of patient reported abdominal pain could be a surrogate of clinical benefit from tipifarnib in pancreatic cancer patients. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled trial comparing gemcitabine plus tipifarnib (GT) versus gemcitabine plus placebo (GP) in pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients. Tipifarnib was given at 200 mg bid orally continuously; gemcitabine at standard dosing. Primary study end point was overall survival. Results: 688 patients were enrolled of whom 155 (22.5%) reported no abdominal pain at study entry, 81 received GT and 74 GP. Baseline characteristics were balanced in the subset of patients with no reported abdominal pain (GT,GP): median age (63,59), female gender (35%,43%), ECOG 0-1 (89%,90%), metastatic disease (64%,70%), 6-month weight loss >10% (48%,39%), 6-month jaundice history (51%,45%), and prior Whipple surgery (16%,13%). Subjects receiving GT who did not report abdominal pain at study entry had higher frequency of locally advanced disease (36% vs 24%) and 6-month jaundice (51% vs 38%), and lower frequency of lung (6% vs 14%) and peritoneum (4% vs 13%) metastases than those reporting pain. No differences in survival were observed in the overall study. Median overall survival for GT was 193 vs 182 days for GP. Notably, absence of abdominal pain at study entry was associated with higher median survival in the GT arm (no pain, pain): 305 vs 176 days, HR=0.52, p<0.0001, whereas no significant effect was observed in the control arm: 184 vs 182 days. A trend for better survival with GT was observed in subset of patients with no abdominal pain at study entry (GT,GP): 305 vs 184 days, p=0.058. Conclusions: Absence of abdominal pain may serve as a surrogate of clinical benefit from tipifarnib in pancreatic cancer. (Van Cutsem et al. JCO 2004;22:1430-8; NCT00005648; Trial Sponsor: J&J PRD). Clinical trial information: NCT00005648.

A phase II trial of gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in previously untreated metasetatic or recurrent pancreatic cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14685-e14685
Author(s):  
Sun Jin Sym ◽  
Junsik Hong ◽  
Minkyu Jung ◽  
Yang Seo Koo ◽  
Yeon Ho Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Survival Duration ◽  
One Year

e14685 Background: Treatment with single agent gemcitabine provides modest benefits in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.This study was performed to determine the efficacy of gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in patient with recurrent or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Methods: This was a prospective, single-arm, single center study in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic or recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoint was objective response. 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 18 patients. If at least two objective responses were obtained, then a further 25 patients would be enrolled into the study. If no more than two responses were obtained among these 18 patients, the study would be halted. The study patients received gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 on day1, plus oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 on day 1 and capecitabine 800 mg/m2/day on days 1-7 every 14 days. Treatment was to be administered until disease progression or until withdrawal from the study due to unacceptable toxicity or other reasons. Results: Eighteen patients were enrolled. Median age was 63 years (range, 39-73 years). Among these 18 patients, only one patient (5.5%) achieved an objective response. Therefore, the accrual terminated. The median time to disease progression was 2.1 months, and the median overall survival duration was 4.9 months. One-year overall survival rates were 35.3%. The most frequently reported grade 3 or 4 adverse events were asthenia (16.6%), and nausea (5.5%). There were no unexpected toxicities. Conclusions: The addition of oxaliplatin and capecitabine to gemcitabine did not improve objective response in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

A phase II trial of gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in previously untreated metastatic or recurrent pancreatic cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 344-344
Author(s):  
Sun Jin Sym ◽  
Junsik Hong ◽  
Minkyu Jung ◽  
Yang Seo Koo ◽  
Yeon Ho Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Survival Duration ◽  
One Year

344 Background: Treatment with single agent gemcitabine provides modest benefits in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. This study was performed to determine the efficacy of gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in patient with recurrent or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Methods: This was a prospective, single-arm, single center study in patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic or recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoint was objective response. 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 18 patients. If at least two objective responses were obtained, then a further 25 patients would be enrolled into the study. If no more than two responses were obtained among these 18 patients, the study would be halted. The study patients received gemcitabine 800 mg/m2, plus oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 and capecitabine 800 mg/m2/day on days 1-7 every 14 days. Treatment was to be administered until disease progression or until withdrawal from the study due to unacceptable toxicity or other reasons. Results: Eighteen patients were enrolled. Median age was 63 years (range, 39-73 years). Among these 18 patients, only one patient (5.5%) achieved an objective response. Therefore, the accrual terminated. The median time to disease progression was 2.1 months, and the median overall survival duration was 4.9 months. One-year overall survival rates were 35.3%. The most frequently reported grade 3 or 4 adverse events were asthenia (16.6%), and nausea (5.5%). There were no unexpected toxicities. Conclusions: The addition of oxaliplatin and capecitabine to gemcitabine did not improve objective response in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Association between feeling of well-being and overall survival in advanced lung or non-colonic gastrointestinal patients receiving palliative care.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 199-199
Author(s):  
Sriram Yennu ◽  
Yu Jung Kim ◽  
Yi Zhang ◽  
Ji Chan Park ◽  
David Hui ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Assessment System ◽  
Advanced Lung Cancer ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Family Distress

199 Background: The aim of this study was to determine the association between feeling of well-being (FWB, 0= best, 10= worst) and overall survival in advanced lung or non-colonic gastrointestinal patients who were referred to an outpatient palliative care clinic (OPC). We also determined the predictors of severity of moderate or severe - feeling of well-being in advanced lung or non-colonic gastrointestinal patients presenting to palliative care. Methods: We reviewed the records of consecutive patients with incurable advanced lung cancer and non-colonic gastrointestinal cancer presenting to OPC. Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) scores were obtained at the initial visit between from Jan. 1, 2008-Dec. 31, 2013. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize patient characteristics. Clinically significant FWB was defined as ≥4/10. Overall Survival (OS) was calculated from the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer to death or last contact. Univariate analyses were performed and only significant variables were included in multivariate regression analysis to determine factors associated with severity OF FWB. Results: A total of 826 evaluable patients were analyzed (median age, 62 years; 57% male). Median ESAS FWB scores was 5 IQR (3-7). Worse FWB was significantly associated with OS (months) 6.33 (5.03, 8) vs 4.2 (3.37, 4.67) P=0.0003, from the time of diagnosis of advanced cancer. The final model of the Backwards Stepwise regression of factors associated with OS found that FWB (HR 1.09, p=0.3) was not an independent predictor of OS. ESAS FWB was significantly associated with ESAS fatigue (OR 2.31, p<0.001); anxiety (OR 1.98, p<0.001); anorexia (OR 2.31, p<0.001); CAGE positivity [alcoholism] (HR 1.80, p=0.008); and family distress (HR 1.93, p=0.002). Conclusions: Worse ESAS FWB showed univariate association with OS but it does not appear to be an independent predictor of OS when controlling for other known predictors. ESAS FWB was significantly associated with fatigue, anxiety, anorexia, CAGE positivity, and family distress, suggests that ESAS FWB may be a multidimensional screening measure for patient reported health related quality of life.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Single-Agent Gemcitabine As First-Line Treatment of Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: The GIP-1 Study

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1645-1651 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giuseppe Colucci ◽  
Roberto Labianca ◽  
Francesco Di Costanzo ◽  
Vittorio Gebbia ◽  
Giacomo Cartenì ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
First Line Treatment

PurposeSingle-agent gemcitabine became standard first-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after demonstration of superiority compared with fluorouracil. The Gruppo Italiano Pancreas 1 randomized phase III trial aimed to compare gemcitabine plus cisplatin versus gemcitabine alone (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT00813696).Patients and MethodsPatients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ≥ 50, were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (arm A) or gemcitabine plus cisplatin (arm B). Arm A: gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2weekly for 7 weeks, and, after a 1-week rest, on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks. Arm B: cisplatin 25 mg/m2added weekly to gemcitabine, except cycle 1 day 22. Primary end point was overall survival. To have 8% power of detecting a 0.74 hazard ratio (HR) of death, with bilateral α .05, 355 events were needed and 400 patients planned.ResultsFour hundred patients were enrolled (arm A: 199; arm B: 201). Median age was 63, 59% were male, 84% had stage IV, and 83% had KPS ≥ 80. Median overall survival was 8.3 months versus 7.2 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.89 to 1.35; P = .38). Median progression-free survival was 3.9 months versus 3.8 months in arm A and B, respectively (HR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.19; P = .80). The objective response rate was 10.1% in A and 12.9% in B (P = .37). Clinical benefit was experienced by 23.0% in A and 15.1% in B (P = .057). Combination therapy produced more hematologic toxicity, without relevant differences in nonhematologic toxicity.ConclusionThe addition of weekly cisplatin to gemcitabine failed to demonstrate any improvement as first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Survival benefit of second-line chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A systematic review of the literature.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 296-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan Nagrial ◽  
Venessa T. Chin ◽  
Katrin Sjoquist ◽  
Lorraine A. Chantrill ◽  
Desmond Yip
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Response Rates ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Second Line Chemotherapy ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

296 Background: There is currently no standard of care for the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Very few randomised studies have been performed in this setting. The aim of this analysis was to compare the different therapeutic approaches in this setting, and the rate of second line treatment delivery and its influence on reported overall survival. Methods: We carried out a systematic analysis of studies in advanced pancreatic cancer. 1st and 2nd line chemotherapy trials were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE & CENTRAL using the COCHRANE sensitive search strategy. Objective response rates (ORR) and survival (PFS & OS) were extracted and compared amongst groups using the Mann-Whitney U test. For 1st line studies, the percentage of patients who received 2nd line chemotherapy was also extracted and plotted against reported median overall survival (OS) and post-progression survival (PPS), defined as arithmetic difference between median OS and progression-free survival. Linear regression was used to explore the relationship between overall survival and second-line chemotherapy. Results: 20 first line clinical trials with 42 treatment arms met the inclusion criteria treating an aggregate total of 5,768 patients. Overall survival was positively correlated with use of second-line chemotherapy (r=0.65; p=0.012). 61 second-line studies were identified treating an aggregate total of 2,562 patients in 66 treatment arms. Combination treatment was associated with an improved response rate (p=0.045) and PFS (p=0.024) when compared to single agent therapy. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis, these data suggest that there is a small benefit of second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer. In first-line chemotherapy studies, the use of subsequent treatment correlates with improved overall survival. In second line studies, combination chemotherapy is associated with higher response rates and survival.

Randomized Phase III Study of Exatecan and Gemcitabine Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Untreated Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (27) ◽  
pp. 4441-4447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ghassan K. Abou-Alfa ◽  
Richard Letourneau ◽  
Graydon Harker ◽  
Manuel Modiano ◽  
Herbert Hurwitz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Water Soluble ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eligibility Criteria

Purpose Exatecan mesylate is a hexacyclic, water-soluble, topoisomerase-1 inhibitor. Exatecan has single-agent and combination activity with gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer. A multicenter, randomized, phase III trial comparing exatecan plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer was conducted. Patients and Methods Eligibility criteria included Karnofsky performance status ≥ 60%, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and no prior chemotherapy. Radiation alone for locally advanced disease was permitted. Patients were randomly assigned on a 1:1 basis. For the exatecan plus gemcitabine arm, exatecan 2.0 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 were administered on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks. Gemcitabine alone was dosed at 1,000 mg/m2 up to 7 weeks in the first cycle, then once a week for the first 3 weeks of a 4-week cycle. Tumor assessment was performed every 6 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. An intent-to-treat analysis was used. Results From August 2001 to January 2003, 349 patients were randomly assigned, 175 to exatecan plus gemcitabine and 174 to gemcitabine alone. Twenty-four patients (6.9%) were not treated. The median survival time was 6.7 months for exatecan plus gemcitabine and 6.2 months for gemcitabine alone (P = .52). One complete response (CR; < 1%) and 11 partial responses (PRs; 6.3%) were observed in the exatecan plus gemcitabine treatment group, and one CR (< 1%) and eight PRs (4.6%) were observed in the gemcitabine-alone group. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were higher for the exatecan plus gemcitabine arm versus the gemcitabine alone arm; neutropenia (30% v 15%) and thrombocytopenia (15% v 4%). Conclusion Exatecan plus gemcitabine was not superior to gemcitabine alone with respect to overall survival in the first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document