Symptom changes that predict disease control by systemic chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 195-195
Author(s):  
Akiko Kuwahara ◽  
Shuichi Mitsunaga ◽  
Izumi Ohno ◽  
Satoshi Shimizu ◽  
Hideaki Takahashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Sleep Disturbance ◽  
Systemic Chemotherapy ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Tumor Control ◽  
Symptom Changes

195 Background: Alleviation of symptoms is related to good tumor control in patients undergoing systemic chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer (PC). The predictive value of symptom change has not been fully understood. The aim of this study was to identify symptom changes that predicted disease control by systemic chemotherapy in PC patients. Methods: Patients with unresectable PC who had not received any anti-cancer therapy for PC were eligible for inclusion in this study. Patients with obvious infectious conditions were excluded. Symptoms were scored from 0 to 10 using the Japanese version of the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory before the start of chemotherapy and one month later. The response of the tumor was evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) vs. 1.0. Disease control was defined as CR, PR, or SD. An attempt was made to identify symptom changes that predicted disease control, and their impact on progression-free survival (PFS) was assessed. Results: The symptoms of 87 patients (male/female: 46/41, Karnofsky performance status (KPS): 100/90/80/70-50: 32/29/17/9, median age: 66 years) were prospectively assessed. Gemcitabine monotherapy (GEM), a GEM-based regimen, and S-1 monotherapy were performed in 42, 41, and 4 patients, respectively. Disease control was observed in 31 patients. The pain scores (P=0.047) and sleep disturbance scores (P=0.052) one month later were lower than before treatment in patients with disease control. Patients without deterioration of pain or sleep disturbance had a higher frequency of disease control (P=0.098 and P=0.004, respectively) and a longer PFS (P=0.021 and P<0.001, respectively) than patients whose pain or sleep disturbance became more severe. Conclusions: Improvements in pain and sleep disturbance scores at one month predict disease control by systemic chemotherapy in patients with advanced PC.

scholarly journals Attenuated regimen of biweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in patients aged 65 years or older with advanced pancreatic cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175628482097491
Author(s):  
Hasan Rehman ◽  
Jeffrey Chi ◽  
Nausheen Hakim ◽  
Shreya Prasad Goyal ◽  
Coral Olazagasti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Group Performance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Poor Performance ◽  
Poor Performance Status ◽  
Weekly Schedule ◽  
Dose Reductions

Background: Treatment with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel confers a survival benefit over gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). However, such treatment can be associated with significant toxicities especially in older patients and carries practical disadvantages related to a weekly schedule along with financial cost. We retrospectively analyzed patients >65 years of age with APC who received a modified biweekly regimen of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel to evaluate efficacy and toxicity. Methods: Patients aged >65 years with chemo-naïve APC with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ⩽2 were studied. Patients were treated with a modified regimen of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 and nab-paclitaxel 125 mg/m2 every 2 weeks on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. Patients were evaluated for progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with analyses performed using the Kaplan–Meier method. Adverse events were recorded on the day of chemotherapy. Cancer antigen 19.9 was measured in every cycle and restaging scans were performed every two cycles. Results: A total of 73 patients (median age: 73 years; range: 66–93) were treated with biweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as first-line treatment. The median OS and PFS were 9.1 months and 4.8 months, respectively. Around 66% of patients received growth-factor support based on American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines and no patient developed neutropenic fever. The incidences of grade ⩾3 toxicity for neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neurotoxicity were 2%, 7%, 3%, and 5%, respectively. Dose reductions of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel were required in 10% and 4% patients, respectively. Conclusion: In patients older than >65 years of age with APC, a modified regimen of biweekly gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel was found to be effective when compared with the historical control from the MPACT study. This regimen allowed for fewer dose reductions, reduced healthcare costs from additional appointments, travel-related cost, as well as a favorable side-effect profile while maintaining efficacy. Though retrospective in nature, this study underlines the need for further investigation, particularly in elderly patients with poor performance status, such as those with pancreatic cancer, and in order to combine with a third agent, such as a targeted treatment or immunotherapy.

A phase II study of S-1 in gemcitabine-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4115-4115 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Morizane ◽  
T. Okusaka ◽  
J. Furuse ◽  
H. Ishii ◽  
H. Ueno ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Primary Study ◽  
Standard Regimen

4115 Background: Gemcitabine (Gem) monotherapy or Gem-containing chemotherapy is the standard first line therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. After disease progression, there is no standard regimen available. In a previous phase II trial (J. Furuse et al, Proc ASCO 2005: # 4104), S-1 has been reported to show considerable efficacy, achieving a response rate of 37.5% in chemo-naïve patients with pancreatic cancer. This study evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of S-1 in patients with Gem-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer. Methods: Eligibility criteria were pathologically-proven pancreatic cancer with confirmation of progressive disease while receiving Gem-based chemotherapy, Karnofsky performance status 80 to 100%, age 20 to 74 years, with measurable metastatic lesions, adequate hematological, renal and liver functions, and written informed consent. S-1 was administered orally at 40 mg/m2 twice daily for 28 days with a rest period of 14 days as one course. Administration was repeated until the appearance of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary study end point was objective response, secondary end points included toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival, as well as clinical benefit response in symptomatic patients. Results: Forty patients (pts) from two institutions were enrolled between September 2004 and November 2005. Thirty-three pts are currently evaluable for response in this ongoing trial. There have been 5 confirmed partial responses (12.5%), and 14 pts (35%) with stable disease. Median survival has not been reached. Median PFS was 2.1 months. Toxicity data were available for 28 patients. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities were anemia (1 pts), appetite loss (2 pts), and fatigue (2 pts). Conclusions: Preliminary results demonstrated the safety and activity of S-1 in Gem-refractory metastatic pancreatic cancer. Efficacy and toxicity analysis are ongoing. Final results will be presented at the meeting. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

The prognostic value of polymorphisms in the insulin-like growth factor receptor (IGFR) pathway in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC)

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4500-4500
Author(s):  
R. T. Shroff ◽  
M. M. Javle ◽  
X. Dong ◽  
V. S. Kumar ◽  
S. Krishnan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Prognostic Value ◽  
Cox Regression ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Cox Regression Analysis

4500 Background: The IGFR pathway is activated in pancreatic cancer and may result in aggressive disease course. The study of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) involved in this pathway may provide prognostic information and predict response to IGFR directed agents. We investigated IGFR pathway SNPs in patients with LAPC. Methods: We evaluated 39 SNPs from 7 candidate genes in the IGFR pathway (IGF1R, IGF2R, IGF1, IGF2, IRS1, IRS2, IGFBP3) in 105 LAPC patients. DNA extraction from whole blood was performed using the Qiagen Flexigene DNA and Promega Maxwell 16 kits. Genotyping was performed using the Sequenom method. Overall survival was measured from date of diagnosis to date of death or last follow-up. Kaplan-Meier plot, log-rank test, and Cox regression were used to compare survival of patients according to genotype corrected for previously identified prognostic factors, including induction chemotherapy, CA 19–9, albumin, LDH, hemoglobin and Karnofsky performance status (KPS). Results: Median survival time (MST) was 15 months (95% CI 13.3–16.7). Induction chemotherapy, LDH, CA 19–9 level, hemoglobin, and KPS were not significantly associated with survival. Serum albumin and three SNPs of the IGF pathway (IGF1R IVS20–3431A>G, IRS1 G971R, and IGF2 *4352A>G) were significantly associated with prognosis ( Table ). Two of the three genotypes remained as significant predictors for survival in Cox regression analysis when adjusted for clinical factors. A significant combined genotype effect was observed wherein patients with all three deleterious alleles had significantly worse survival than those with only two or one (10 vs. 16.3 vs. 21.3 months, p< 0.0001). Conclusions: These data suggest that SNPs in the IGFR pathway genes may have prognostic value for LAPC patients. This information may identify population subgroups that could benefit from IGFR-targeted agents. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.

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.

Definitive chemoradiation therapy with capecitabine in locally advanced pancreatic cancer

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15558-e15558
Author(s):  
S. Yi ◽  
H. S. Kim ◽  
J. Lee ◽  
S. Park ◽  
Y. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Disease Control ◽  
Combined Therapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Group 2 ◽  
Adverse Factor

e15558 Background: We evaluated safety and efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) with capecitabine in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). We also tried to devise a prognostic model for LAPC undergoing definitive CCRT. Methods: Between January 2004 and January 2008, 39 patients with LAPC treated with capecitabine CCRT were reviewed. Capecitabine was administered at 850 mg/m2 bid every day for 5 weeks. Radiotherapy was given 5 days per week, at 1.8 Gy fractions, over the 5 weeks. Results: Thirty seven (94.8%) patients completed CCRT, and 2 patients removed during the treatment for toxicity issues. Of the 36 evaluable patients, 15 (41.7 %) patients achieved partial response, and 13 (36.1 %) had a stable disease with 77.8% of disease control rate. Among the 28 patients who had achieved disease control after CCRT, 8 patients (21.6 %) received gemcitabine-based post-CCRT chemotherapy without dose reduction or delay. With median 1.8 years of follow- up, the overall survival was 14.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI]; 10.6–17.9 months). Median progression free survival was 11.1 (95% CI 7.2–15.1) for all patients, and 7.9 months (95% CI 6.6–9.2) for those not received post-CCRT chemotherapy. No patient had grade 4 hematologic or non-hematologic toxicity. Eight patients (21.6%) had severe grade 3 toxicities, 7 (18.9%) with gastrointestinal toxicity and 1 (2.7%) with hematologic toxicity. Prognostic factors for survival were serum albumin (P=0.014; relative risk [RR], 3.4; 95% CI, 1.4, 8.6), and adjuvant gemcitabine treatment (P = 0.005; RR, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.2, 10.6). The prognostic grouping resulted in three groups with significantly different prognosis: group 1 (0 adverse factor; n=8; 1-year survival, 87.5%), group 2 (1 adverse factor; n=23; 1-year survival, 52.9%) and group 3 (2 adverse factors; n=8; 1-year survival, 25.0%). Conclusions: Combined therapy with capecitabine CCRT was well tolerated. Capecitabine seems to be a promising regimen in the treatment of LAPC, in terms of response, survival, and tolerable adverse effects. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

A phase Ib study of gemcitabine plus PEGPH20 (pegylated recombinant human hyaluronidase) in patients with stage IV previously untreated pancreatic cancer.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4010-4010 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sunil R. Hingorani ◽  
William Proctor Harris ◽  
J. Thaddeus Beck ◽  
Boris A. Berdov ◽  
Stephanie Ann Wagner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Dose Reduction ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Genetically Engineered ◽  
Dose Escalation Study

4010 Background: PEGPH20 is a PEGylated version of human recombinant hyaluronidase. In preclinical studies, PEGPH20 depleted pancreatic cancers of their high hyaluronan (HA) content. In a genetically-engineered murine model of PDA, PEGPH20 + gemcitabine (Gem) significantly prolonged survival compared to Gem alone. In Ph1 PEGPH20 monotherapy studies, the MTD was 3.0 μg/kg. The most common AEs were musculoskeletal events (MSEs). Methods: This was a dose-escalation study to find the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of PEGPH20 in combination with Gem in patients (pts) with Stage IV previously untreated pancreatic cancer. Pts received PEGPH20 at 1, 1.6, or 3 μg/kg IV twice a week for Wks 1-4, weekly for Wks 5-7, then 1 wk rest. Dose escalation was based on safety. Gem was given at 1000 mg/m2 IV once a week for Wks 1-7, then 1 wk rest. Thereafter, PEGPH20 + Gem were given once a week for 3 wks in 4-wk cycles. Dexamethasone was given pre and post PEGPH20 doses. Results: Of the 28 pts enrolled, the majority had a Karnofsky performance status of 80%, and 85%/19%/26% of pts had liver/lung/visceral metastases. The median age was 58 yrs. Four pts received PEGPH20 at 1 μg/kg, 4 at 1.6 μg/kg, and 20 at 3 μg/kg. The RP2D was 3 μg/kg. Treatment duration ranged from 1-274 days; 5 pts remain on study. Treatment was generally well tolerated. Ten pts had 1 Gem dose reduction, 2 pts had 1 PEGPH20 dose reduction (3 to 1.6 µg/kg), but no pt had a DLT. The most common PEGPH20-related AEs were MSEs (25% Gr1; 18% Gr2) and fatigue (21% Gr1; 11% Gr2). Objective response was assessed by an independent central radiologist using RECIST 1.1. Of the 21 pts evaluable for efficacy, 7 had partial response (PR) for an overall response rate (ORR) of 33%, and 9 had stable disease for ≥ 2 mo. Tumor biopsies from 12 pts were evaluable for HA staining. HA was high in 9 and low in 3. Of the 9 with high HA staining, 5 had PR (56% ORR); HA data were not available for the other 2 PR pts. PK results show dose-dependent exposure consistent with data from PEGPH20 monotherapy studies. Conclusions: PEGPH20 in combination with Gem is generally well tolerated in advanced pancreatic cancer and shows promising efficacy, especially in pts with high intratumoral HA content. Clinical trial information: NCT01453153.

The biomarkers of gemcitabine and erlotinib treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 358-358
Author(s):  
Kuniyasu Irie ◽  
Makoto Ueno ◽  
Satoshi Kobayashi ◽  
Yoshihiro Gouda ◽  
Shinichi Ohkawa ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Multivariate Analysis ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Antiulcer Drugs ◽  
The Difference

358 Background: A combination of gemcitabine+erlotinib is one of the standard chemotherapies in advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). Since APC patients often take antiulcer drugs to prevent gastritis (e.g., NSAIDs to reduce cancer pain), erlotinib concentration is generally decreased through the mechanism of CYP3A4. Furthermore, unlike lung cancer, the biomarkers for APC are not obvious except rash. Here, we examined biomarkers of gemcitabine+erlotinib treatment in APC patients including the presence of antiulcer drugs. Methods: The subjects were 59 advanced pancreatic cancer patients. They were treated with gemcitabine+erlotinib starting from Nov. 2011 to Apr. 2013. Gemcitabine was administered at 1000 mg/m2, on days 1, 8, and 15 for every 4 weeks, and erlotinib was taken 100 mg daily. The progression-free survival (PFS), UICC stage, sex, age, CRP concentration, performance status (PS), rash, and presence of antiulcer drugs were examined. The PFS curve was plotted according to the method of Kaplan and Meier. The difference in the PFS was calculated using the log-rank test, and a multivariate analysis was conducted using Cox hazard model. Results: UICC stages were as follows; i.e., stage II: 1, stage III: 8, and stage IV: 50. There were 36 males and 23 females, and their ages ranged from 41 to 82 years old (median: 65). The CRP concentrations ranged from 0.02 to 11.5 mg/dl (median: 0.57). 37 patients received antiulcer drugs, and 48 patients had rash. The univariate analysis revealed that the CRP concentration and rash were significant (p=0.009 and p=0.005, respectively). Low CRP (<0.57mg/dl) and presence of rash were related to good PFS. The multivariate analysis also revealed that the CRP concentration (HR, 0.34; 95%CI, 0.16-072; p=0.005) and rash (HR, 0.40; 95%CI, 0.16-0.96; p=0.04) were significant. The presence of antiulcer drugs on PFS was insignificant. Conclusions: The CRP concentration and rash were biomarkers of gemcitabine+erlotinib treatment in APC patients.

Outcomes of patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 299-299
Author(s):  
Shaina D'Lee Templeton ◽  
Michael Moser ◽  
Haji I. Chalchal ◽  
John Shaw ◽  
Yigang Luo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Pancreatic Head ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Incomplete Resection ◽  
Resectable Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Curative Surgery ◽  
Borderline Resectable ◽  
Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

299 Background: Pancreatic cancer is a major cause of cancer-related death. Less than 20% of patients have resectable disease at diagnosis. Patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) are at high risk of incomplete resection with upfront surgery. Currently there is no standard induction chemotherapy regimen exists for BRPC. Both FOLFIRINOX (5-FU, irinotecan, oxaliplatin) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have shown better efficacy than gemcitabine in advanced pancreatic cancer. The current study aims to assess outcomes of real-world patients with BRCP who received induction FOLFIRINOX or GnP. Methods: In this population-based multicenter retrospective cohort study patients with biopsy proven BRPC as defined by the pancreatic surgical team diagnosed from 2011-2017, in the province of Saskatchewan, Canada, who received FOLFIRINOX or GnP were assessed. Kaplan Meier methods and log rank tests were performed for survival analyses. Results: Of 161 patients with pancreatic cancer who received FOLFIRINOX or GnP during the study period, 20 eligible patients with BRPC, with median age of 65 yrs (54-79) and M:F 14:6, were identified. 85% had pancreatic head tumours with a median CA19-9 of 470 u/mL. Of eligible patients, 10 each received FOLFIRINOX or GnP. No significant differences were found between the two groups, except more patients in FOLFIRINOX group had a WHO performance status of 0 (50% vs. 10%, p = 0.057) and had a higher body mass index (27.0 vs. 23.0, p = 0.027). Eleven patients showed partial response (5–FOLFIRINOX and 6–GnP), three progressed during treatment. Five patients (4–FOLFIRINOX, 1–GnP, p = NS) underwent curative surgery. Five patients (1–FOLFIRINOX, 4–Gnp) had radiation and four underwent Nanoknife procedure (3–FOLFIRINOX, 1–GnP). The median progression free survival was 17 months in FOLFIRINOX (95% CI: 5.3-28.6) versus nine months (3.0-15) in GnP group (p = 0.26). The median overall survival was 32 months in FOLFIRINOX (not reach) versus 16 months (9.3-22.7) in GnP group (p = 0.15). Conclusions: The current study suggests that patients with BRPC who received FOLFIRINOX tends to have better outcomes. Future study are warranted to establish a preferred systemic therapy for BRPC.

Gemcitabine in Combination With Oxaliplatin Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Results of a GERCOR and GISCAD Phase III Trial

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (15) ◽  
pp. 3509-3516 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Louvet ◽  
R. Labianca ◽  
P. Hammel ◽  
G. Lledo ◽  
M.G. Zampino ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Combined Treatment ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose Gemcitabine (Gem) is the standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer. Given the promising phase II results obtained with the Gem-oxaliplatin (GemOx) combination, we conducted a phase III study comparing GemOx with Gem alone in advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer were stratified according to center, performance status, and type of disease (locally advanced v metastatic) and randomly assigned to either GemOx (gemcitabine 1 g/m2 as a 100-minute infusion on day 1 and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion on day 2 every 2 weeks) or Gem (gemcitabine 1 g/m2 as a weekly 30-minute infusion). Results Three hundred twenty-six patients were enrolled; 313 were eligible, and 157 and 156 were allocated to the GemOx and Gem arms, respectively. GemOx was superior to Gem in terms of response rate (26.8% v 17.3%, respectively; P = .04), progression-free survival (5.8 v 3.7 months, respectively; P = .04), and clinical benefit (38.2% v 26.9%, respectively; P = .03). Median overall survival (OS) for GemOx and Gem was 9.0 and 7.1 months, respectively (P = .13). GemOx was well tolerated overall, although a higher incidence of National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade 3 and 4 toxicity per patient was observed for platelets (14.0% for GemOx v 3.2% for Gem), vomiting (8.9% for GemOx v 3.2% for Gem), and neurosensory symptoms (19.1% for GemOx v 0% for Gem). Conclusion These results confirm the efficacy and safety of GemOx, but this study failed to demonstrate a statistically significant advantage in terms of OS compared with Gem. Because GemOx is the first combined treatment to be superior to Gem alone in terms of clinical benefit, this promising regimen deserves further development.

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