scholarly journals Advanced pancreatic cancer: The standard of care and new opportunities

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrallah A. Mohammad
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Mortality Rate ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Molecular Analysis ◽  
Therapeutic Approach ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care

Presentation of pancreatic cancer is localized, locally advanced or metastatic. With the later represented the main bulk (more than 80%). Despite the significant innovation in molecular analysis and therapeutic approach in many types of cancer in the last two decades, still the outcome of advanced pancreatic cancer is disappointing and the mortality rate approximately unchanged. In this mandated review we intended to highlight the standard of care and emerging agents for advanced pancreatic cancer treatment.

scholarly journals Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Current Clinical Outcomes, Mechanism of Action and Opportunities for Synergistic Therapy

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (8) ◽  
pp. 1609
Author(s):  
Zainab L. Rai ◽  
Roger Feakins ◽  
Laura J. Pallett ◽  
Derek Manas ◽  
Brian R. Davidson
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Mechanism Of Action ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Irreversible Electroporation ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Animal Data ◽  
Standard Of Care Treatment ◽  
Apoptosis And Necrosis

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) accounts for 30% of patients with pancreatic cancer. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel cancer treatment that may improve survival and quality of life in LAPC. This narrative review will provide a perspective on the clinical experience of pancreas IRE therapy, explore the evidence for the mode of action, assess treatment complications, and propose strategies for augmenting IRE response. A systematic search was performed using PubMed regarding the clinical use and safety profile of IRE on pancreatic cancer, post-IRE sequential histological changes, associated immune response, and synergistic therapies. Animal data demonstrate that IRE induces both apoptosis and necrosis followed by fibrosis. Major complications may result from IRE; procedure related mortality is up to 2%, with an average morbidity as high as 36%. Nevertheless, prospective and retrospective studies suggest that IRE treatment may increase median overall survival of LAPC to as much as 30 months and provide preliminary data justifying the well-designed trials currently underway, comparing IRE to the standard of care treatment. The mechanism of action of IRE remains unknown, and there is a lack of data on treatment variables and efficiency in humans. There is emerging data suggesting that IRE can be augmented with synergistic therapies such as immunotherapy.

Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Current Therapeutic Approach

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. 612-623 ◽  
Author(s):  
Higinia R. Cardenes ◽  
Elena G. Chiorean ◽  
John DeWitt ◽  
Max Schmidt ◽  
Patrick Loehrer
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Therapeutic Approach ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Effect of the addition of platinum to gemcitabine on outcome in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer who progress on gemcitabine: A comprehensive analysis of published trials.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 275-275
Author(s):  
Osama E. Rahma ◽  
David J. Liewehr ◽  
Seth M. Steinberg ◽  
Austin G. Duffy ◽  
Tim F Greten
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
General Search ◽  
Line Setting

275 Background: Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers with an estimated 5 years survival rate of 5%. Until recently gemcitabine had been considered the first line treatment for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Although many chemotherapy regimens have been used there is no standard of care for second line therapy. The aim of this analysis was to identify superior regimen in the second line setting. Methods: We conducted a general search on PubMed for “second line therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer”. We limited our search to trials published in English from 2000 through 2012. Studies presented as abstracts in major meetings were also included. Trials that used targeted therapy other than erlotinib were excluded. We compared in an exploratory fashion the RR, PFS and OS of BSC and each of the following regimens to the rest of the treatments: 5FU+platinum, gemcitabine+platinum, taxol, erlotinib. In addition, we compared the combinations of platinum with either 5FU or gemcitabine. Finally, we explored the trend of these treatments outcomes over time. Results: Forty-four trialswere identified, of which 34 trials (T) met the inclusion criteria treating 1503 patients (N). There was a trend toward an improved overall survival with treatments (T: 33; N: 1269) compared to BSC (T: 2; N: 234) only (P= 0.013). The combination of gemcitabine and platinum (T: 5; N: 154) was the only regimen that showed a trend toward superior outcomes compared to the other regimens (T: 28; N: 1115) in terms of RR and PFS (P= 0.006 and 0.059, respectively). However, there was no difference in overall survival (P= 0.10). When compared to 5FU+platinum (T: 12; N: 450) the regimen of gemcitabine+platinum (T: 5; N: 154) showed only a trend toward significance in terms of improved RR (P= 0.030) with no difference in PFS or OS (P= 0.60 and 0.22, respectively). Overall, there was a trend toward a worse RR and PFS with no change in OS over the past 13 years. Conclusions: The combination of gemcitabine and platinum may provide a valid second line option in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer who progress on gemcitabine.

SCALOP: Results of a randomized phase II study of induction chemotherapy followed by gemcitabine (G) or capecitabine (Cap) based chemoradiation (CRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LANPC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA146-LBA146 ◽  
Author(s):  
Somnath Mukherjee ◽  
Chris Hurt ◽  
Gareth Griffiths ◽  
John A. Bridgewater ◽  
Thomas Crosby ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Induction Chemotherapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Tumor Diameter ◽  
Treatment Volume ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
The Uk

LBA146 Background: CRT with G or 5FU (F) is used to treat LAPC. No multicenter, randomized studies have compared G-CRT vs. F-CRT or the oral fluropyrimidine, Cap-CRT. In the UK, where chemotherapy is traditionally standard of care for LAPC, a trial was conducted to assess the safety, efficacy, and deliverability of G-CRT and Cap-CRT. Methods: Eligibility: histologically proven inoperable LAPC < 7 cm in diameter. Induction chemotherapy: 3 cycles of GEMCAP (G 1,000 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15; Cap 830 mg/m2 days 1-21 q28 days). Patients with stable/responding disease, tumor diameter ≤ 6cm, and PS 0-1 were eligible for CRT randomisation where patients received a further cycle of GEMCAP followed by either Cap (830 mg/m2 bd weekdays only) or G (300 mg/m2 weekly) with radiation (50.4 Gy/28 fractions). Treatment volume = tumour plus enlarged nodes and margins of 2 cm sup-inf and 1.5 cm radially. Prospective RT quality assurance was mandated. Primary end-point was 9-month PFS (Fleming’s design). Funder: Cancer Research UK (CR UK 07/040). Results: Between July 2009 and October 2011, 114 patients from 28 UK centres were registered of whom 74 patients were randomised. Randomised patient characteristics: median age 64.6; 55.4% male; WHO PS (0:1) 41.9%:58.1%; median tumor diameter 4cm; site (head:body) 85.1%:14.9%. During CRT, more patients in the G arm experienced grade 3/4 haematological (18.4% vs 0%, p=0.007) and non-haematological (26.3% vs 11.1%, p=0.095) toxicity. Both C and G arms passed the primary endpoint with 9-month PFS of 62.9% (80% CIs: 50.6%-73.9%) and 51.4% (80% CIs: 39.4%-63.4%) respectively. OS was significantly superior in the Cap-CRT arm (median OS 15.2 vs 13.4 months, HR=0.50, log rank p=0.025). Conclusions: SCALOP is the largest RCT comparing radio-sensitizers in pancreatic cancer and demonstrates that both G-CRT and Cap-CRT can be delivered safely and effectively. Both regimens met the pre-specified PFS criteria. Compared to G-CRT, Cap-CRT demonstrated significantly better survival and toxicity and should form the template regimen for future trials investigating RT dose escalation and combination with novel radio-sensitizers. Clinical trial information: NCT01032057.

The phase I study of concurrent chemoradiotherapy using a combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer: Update.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 462-462 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatsuya Ioka ◽  
Kazuhiro Katayama ◽  
Ryoji Takada ◽  
Kazuyoshi Ohkawa ◽  
Hidenori Takahashi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer ◽  
Hematological Toxicity ◽  
Level 3 ◽  
Delay Of Treatment

462 Background: Gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (nP) are one of the standard of care for metastatic pancreatic cancer, but it is still controversial about the value in non-metastatic patients. Purpose: The primary objective of this study is to assess the toxicity of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) with a combination of GEM and nP for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (UR-LAPC). Methods: Chemotherapy-naive patients with histologically or cytologically proven UR-LAPC were enrolled to this trial. The patients received GEM and nP intravenously over 30 min. respectively on days 1, 8 and 15 every 28 days. Cycles were repeated every 28 days during radiotherapy. Patients were scheduled to receive GEM (mg/msq/week) and nP (mg/msq/day) at six dose levels: 600/50 (level 1), 600/75 (level 2), 600/100 (level 3), 800/100 (level 4), 1,000/100(level 5) and 1,000/125(level 6). Radiation therapy was delivered through four fields as a total dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions over 5.5 weeks, and no prophylactic nodal irradiation was given. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as grade 4 hematological toxicity, grade 3 non-hematological toxicity and >14 days delay of treatment. Every patients were evaluated for response with RECIST criteria. Results: Twenty one patients were enrolled in this study between 12/2013 and 05/2015. Treatment was well tolerated; Every 21 patients completed radiotherapy of 50.4 Gy. Our recommended dose was level 3, Gem 600mg/ nP 100mg. Nine patients experienced DLT. The response rate was 67% (CR 0, PR 14, SD 6 and PD 1). Median OS was 23.8 months (95%CI: 17.0, -) and median PFS was 9.0 months (95%CI: 4.8, 11.9). Conclusions: The CRT with a combination of GEM and nP can be delivered almost safely for UR-LAPC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000012254.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document