Gemcitabine-based or capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial

Surgical Indications of Distal Pancreatectomy with Celiac Axis Resection for Pancreatic Body/Tail Cancer

BACKGROUND

The survival impact of distal pancreatectomy (DP) with celiac axis resection for locally advanced pancreatic body/tail cancer remains unclear.

METHODS

A total of 16 patients underwent DP with celiac axis resection, while 76 underwent standard DP for pancreatic body/tail cancer. The indications for DP with celiac axis resection included: (a) tumor invasion of either the celiac axis or common hepatic artery or both [CA/CHA (+)] and (b) tumor invasion of the root of the splenic artery, which is difficult to dissect without securing an adequate surgical margin [CA/CHA (-)].

RESULTS

DP with celiac axis resection presented longer operative time and greater amount of blood loss than DP. The median survival time was 17.5 months in the DP with celiac axis resection group and 43.1 months in the DP group (p = 0.040). Among the patients who underwent DP with celiac axis resection, the median survival time was 35.1 months in the CA/CHA (-) group and 13.2 months in the CA/CHA (+) group (p = 0.001). Comparing the patients undergoing standard DP and DP with celiac axis resection with a CA/CHA (-) status, there were no significant differences in either disease-free or overall survival times. The CA19-9 value, CA/CHA (+) status, and microscopic venous infiltration were revealed independent significant prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

DP with celiac axis resection should therefore be indicated in patients with a CA/CHA (-) status. However, it is difficult to justify the use of DP with celiac axis resection in patients with CA/CHA (+) status due to the poor survival.

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer: An emerging entity

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly fatal disease that is increasing in incidence. PDAC can be classified according to resectability status with 3 nonmetastatic groups defined: resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced PDAC (LAPC). Delineating these subtypes is important with the optimal treatment approach dictated by high-quality CT imaging and multidisciplinary team discussion. Patients with LAPC are thought unresectable and are therefore rarely cured. In these patients, chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Aggressive approaches in this cohort are increasingly employed. Local therapies after induction chemotherapy including standard fractionation radiation, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and irreversible electroporation (IRE) are being investigated in an attempt to improve long-term control. In some cases, responses to neoadjuvant therapy may facilitate surgical resection. Biomarkers that can select patients most likely to benefit from these options are urgently needed. This review aims to highlight the emerging treatment of patients with LAPC and to discuss current trials.

Selecting patients for resection after primary chemotherapy for non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Patients with borderline (BL) or locally advanced (LA) pancreatic adenocarcinoma are usually treated with primary chemotherapy (CT), followed by resection when feasible. Scanty data are available about the criteria to candidate patients to resection after CT.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 2002 and 2016 overall 223 patients diagnosed with BL or LA pancreatic adenocarcinoma were primarily treated with Gemcitabine combination (4-drugs or nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine) for 3-6 months followed by surgery and/or chemoradiation. Resection was carried out when radical resection could be predicted by imaging studies and intraoperative findings. The prognostic value of both pre-treatment factors and treatment response was retrospectively evaluated, searching for criteria that could improve the selection of patients for surgery.

RESULTS

Median survival (MS) for the whole population was 18.3 months. Surgical resection was carried out in 61 patients; MS in resected patients was significantly longer (30.0 months) as compared with 162 non-resected patients (16.5 months) (P < 0.00001). According to response criteria, 48% had a radiological partial response, 47% a stable disease and 5% a disease progression); CA19.9 response (reduction >50%) was obtained in 77.8% of patients. Among resected patients, neither pre-treatment factors, including BL/LA distinction, nor radiological response, were able to prognosticate survival differences. Survival of resected patients having no CA19.9 response was significantly lower as compared with responders (MS 15.0 versus 31.5 months, P = 0.04), and was similar to non-responders patients that did not undergo resection (MS 10.9 months, P= 0.25). Multivariate analysis carried out on the overall population, showed that Karnofsky performance status, T3-T4 status, resection and CA19.9 response were independent prognostic factors, while radiological response, BL/LA distinction and baseline CA19.9 had not significant influence on survival.

CONCLUSIONS

CA19.9 response may allow a better selection of patients who will benefit from resection after primary CT for BL or LA pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Multimodality Therapy in Patients With Borderline Resectable or Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Importance of Locoregional Therapies for a Systemic Disease

Historically, the clinical staging of pancreatic cancer has centered on the surgical management of the primary tumor, because few effective chemotherapeutic agents were available and long-term survival was only achieved in the context of surgical resection. Such a strategy of complete oncologic surgical care is reasonable when surgery is both the principal therapy and highly effective. However, complex surgery for pancreatic cancer-often performed in older patients after a lengthy period of induction therapy-can be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The majority of patients with pancreatic cancer present either locally advanced or metastatic disease at the time of diagnosis. In this article, we will discuss the role of multimodality management of patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Considering that surgery has a modest impact on the natural history of pancreatic cancer in most patients, a neoadjuvant approach to treatment sequencing is favored for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and this same rationale has been extended to select patients with locally advanced disease who demonstrate an exceptional response to induction therapy.

The role of induction chemotherapy + chemoradiotherapy in localised pancreatic cancer: initial experience in Scotland

BACKGROUND

Despite being relatively rare pancreatic cancer is one of the highest causes of death. Even within the potentially resectable group outcomes are poor. We present our initial experiences utilising a neoadjuvant approach to localised pancreatic cancer, evaluating survival, response rates and tolerability.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively maintained database. Patients from 2012 to 2015 referred to a busy regional Hepato-Pancreatic Biliary (HPB) MDT were included. Patients were classified according to respectability criteria (utilising NCCN guidelines) and a treatment plan agreed. Systemic therapy with either FOLFIRINOX or Gem/Cap was delivered followed by chemoradiotherapy if disease remained localised. Toxicity, response, pathological outcomes and survival were all recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 85 patients were included in the study: 45 had initially resectable disease; 19 required a response for resection and 21 had locally advanced inoperable disease; 34 patients underwent resection. The median survival for the potentially resectable group was 22.2 months while for those undergoing resection it was 37 months.

CONCLUSIONS

We have demonstrated that a neoadjuvant approach is deliverable and tolerable. In addition we have demonstrated impressive survival results in patients undergoing resection with no detriment in outcome for those not proceeding to surgery.

Clinical effects of chemoradiotherapy in pursuit of optimal treatment of locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

The treatment of locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer remains extremely challenging, particularly as the efficacy of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) remains unclear.

METHODS

We studied 93 patients (8.0%) with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer without distant metastases from among a total group of 1168 patients who were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer from March 2005 to November 2015 at the Kochi Health Sciences Center, Kochi, Japan. We therefore evaluated the clinical efficacy of CRT in patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer.

RESULTS

Of the 93 patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer, 35 patients (37.6%) were subsequently classified as having resectable disease following CRT. The median overall survival of patients who received CRT alone for locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer was 8.0 months, and all died within 3 years. On the other hand, the overall 1-, 3- and 5-year survival rates in patients who were reclassified as having resectable tumour after CRT were 71.3%, 39.2% and 23.5%, respectively. Our pathological assessments after surgical resection suggested that CRT might be associated with a significant reduction in the risk of lymph node metastases in patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggested that CRT is clinically effective in improving survival, particularly in association with the resultant possibility of curative resection. Advances in knowledge: The best treatment strategy for patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer is the subject of considerable debate, and CRT is only recommended if cancer has only grown around the pancreas without any distant metastases.

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Current and Evolving Therapies

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which constitutes 90% of pancreatic cancers, is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the world. Due to the broad heterogeneity of genetic mutations and dense stromal environment, PDAC belongs to one of the most chemoresistant cancers. Most of the available treatments are palliative, with the objective of relieving disease-related symptoms and prolonging survival. Currently, available therapeutic options are surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and use of targeted drugs. However, thus far, therapies targeting cancer-associated molecular pathways have not given satisfactory results; this is due in part to the rapid upregulation of compensatory alternative pathways as well as dense desmoplastic reaction. In this review, we summarize currently available therapies and clinical trials, directed towards a plethora of pathways and components dysregulated during PDAC carcinogenesis. Emerging trends towards targeted therapies as the most promising approach will also be discussed.

Management of unresectable, locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

The diagnosis of unresectable locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LAPC) requires confirmation, through imaging tests, of the unfeasibility of achieving a complete surgical resection, in the absence of metastatic spread. The increase in overall survival (OS), together with an appropriate symptom management is the therapeutic target in LAPC, maintaining an acceptable quality of life and, if possible, increasing the time until the appearance of metastasis. Chemoradiation (CRT) improves OS compared to best support treatment or radiotherapy (RT) but with greater toxicity. No significant increase in OS has been achieved with CRT when compared to chemotherapy (QT) alone in patients without disease progression after four months of treatment with QT. However, a significantly better local control, that is, a significant increase in the time to disease progression was associated with this approach. The greater effectiveness of the schemes FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine (Gem) + Nab-paclitaxel compared to gemcitabine alone, has been extrapolated from metastatic disease to LAPC, representing a possible alternative for patients with good performance status (ECOG 0-1). In the absence of randomized clinical trials, Gem is the standard treatment in LAPC. If disease control is achieved after 4-6 cycles of QT, the use of CRT for consolidation can be considered an option vs QT treatment maintenance. Capecitabine has a better toxicity profile and effectiveness compared to gemcitabine as a radiosensitizer. After local progression, and without evidence of metastases, treatment with RT or CRT, in selected patients, can support to maintain the regional disease control.

The Role of Consolidation Chemoradiotherapy in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Chemotherapy: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

The role of consolidation chemoradiation (CCRT) after systemic chemotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is still controversial. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of CCRT in LAPC using systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies.

Materials and Methods

Prospective clinical trials of LAPC receiving chemotherapy with or without subsequent CCRT were included in the analysis. We systematically searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. The primary outcome of interest was 1-year survival. Secondary endpoints were median overall survival, progression-free survival, toxicity, and resection rate.

Results

Forty-one studies with 49 study arms were included with a total of 1,018 patients receiving CCRT after induction chemotherapy (ICT) and 954 patients receiving chemotherapy alone. CCRT after ICT did not improve 1-year survival significantly in LAPC patients compared with chemotherapy alone (58% vs. 52%). ICT lasted for at least 3 months revealed significantly improved survival of additional CCRT to LAPC patients compared to chemotherapy alone (65% vs. 52%). A marginal survival benefit of consolidation CCRT was noted in studies using maintenance chemotherapy (59% vs. 52%), and fluorouracil-based CCRT (64% vs. 52%), as well as in studies conducted after the 2010 (64% vs. 55%).

Conclusion

The survival benefit of ICT+CCRT over chemotherapy alone in treating LAPC was noted when ICT lasted for at least 3 months. Fluorouracil-based CCRT, and maintenance chemotherapy were associated with improved clinical outcomes.

Modelling duodenum radiotherapy toxicity using cohort dose-volume-histogram data

Background and purpose

Gastro-intestinal toxicity is dose-limiting in abdominal radiotherapy and correlated with duodenum dose-volume parameters. We aimed to derive updated NTCP model parameters using published data and prospective radiotherapy quality-assured cohort data.

Material and methods

A systematic search identified publications providing duodenum dose-volume histogram (DVH) statistics for clinical studies of conventionally-fractionated radiotherapy. Values for the Lyman-Kutcher-Burman (LKB) NTCP model were derived through sum-squared-error minimisation and using leave-one-out cross-validation. Data were corrected for fraction size and weighted according to patient numbers, and the model refined using individual patient DVH data for two further cohorts from prospective clinical trials.

Results

Six studies with published DVH data were utilised, and with individual patient data included outcomes for 531 patients in total (median follow-up 16 months). Observed gastro-intestinal toxicity rates ranged from 0% to 14% (median 8%). LKB parameter values for unconstrained fit to published data were: n = 0.070, m = 0.46, TD₅₀₍₁₎ [Gy] = 183.8, while the values for the model incorporating the individual patient data were n = 0.193, m = 0.51, TD₅₀₍₁₎ [Gy] = 299.1.

Conclusions

LKB parameters derived using published data are shown to be consistent to those previously obtained using individual patient data, supporting a small volume-effect and dependence on exposure to high threshold dose.

Correlation of 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography Parameters with Patterns of Disease Progression in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer after Definitive Chemoradiotherapy

AIMS

A proportion of patients with pancreatic cancer never develop metastatic disease. We evaluated a role for 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in identifying a subset of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) who never develop metastatic disease and only experience local disease and may therefore benefit from local treatment intensification.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients with histologically confirmed LAPC entered a single-centre phase II study of definitive upfront chemoradiotherapy (CRT). All patients underwent FDG-PET/CT before and 6 weeks after CRT. Tumour volume, standardised uptake values (SUVmax, SUVpeak, SUVmean, SUVmedian) and total lesion glycolysis (TLG) were measured on each scan and the response in each parameter was evaluated. The presence or absence of metastatic disease was noted on contrast-enhanced CT carried out every 3 months for 1 year and then at clinician discretion.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with LAPC were recruited; 17/23 completed treatment and had interpretable sequential imaging. Twenty-four per cent of patients only ever experienced local disease. Median pre-CRT FDG-PET parameters were significantly lower in patients with local disease only during follow-up compared with those who developed metastatic disease: SUVmax 3.8 versus 8.6 (P=0.006), SUVpeak 2.5 versus 7.5 (P=0.002), SUVmean 1.8 versus 3.3 (P=0.001), SUVmedian 1.7 versus 3.0 (P=0.002), TLG 26.9 versus 115.9 (P=0.006). Tumour volume, post-CRT FDG-PET values and their relative change were not statistically different between local disease and metastatic disease groups. Receiver operating characteristic curves for pre-CRT FDG-PET parameters to predict those who never develop metastatic disease all had areas under the curve (AUCs) ≥ 0.932. Pre-CRT FDG-PET SUVmax < 6.2 predicted patients with local disease only during follow-up with 100.0% sensitivity and 92.3% specificity, 80.0% positive predictive value and 100% negative predictive value.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that patients with less FDG-avid tumours are less likely to metastasise and may therefore benefit from upfront local treatment intensification.

Can Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Be a Viable and Efficient Therapeutic Option for Unresectable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma? Results of a Phase 2 Study

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of stereotactic body radiotherapy in patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients received a prescription dose of 45 Gy in 6 fractions. Primary end point was freedom from local progression. Secondary end points were overall survival, progression-free survival, and toxicity. Actuarial survival analysis and univariate or multivariate analysis were investigated.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients were enrolled in a phase 2 trial. Median follow-up was 13.5 months. Freedom from local progression was 90% at 2 years. On univariate ( P < .03) and multivariate analyses ( P < .001), lesion size was statistically significant for freedom from local progression. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 8 and 13 months, respectively. On multivariate analysis, tumor size ( P < .001) and freedom from local progression ( P < .002) were significantly correlated with overall survival. Thirty-two (71%) patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer received chemotherapy before stereotactic body radiotherapy. Median overall survival from diagnosis was 19 months. Multivariate analysis showed that freedom from local progression ( P < .035), tumor diameter ( P < .002), and computed tomography before stereotactic body radiotherapy ( P < .001) were significantly correlated with overall survival from diagnosis.

CONCLUSION

Stereotactic body radiotherapy is a safe and effective treatment for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer with no G3 toxicity or greater and could be a promising therapeutic option in multimodality treatment regimen.

Improved Survival in Patients with Resected Pancreatic Carcinoma Using Postoperative Intensity-Modulated Radiotherapy and Regional Intra-Arterial Infusion Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND We assessed the role of adjuvant intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in combination with chemotherapy for pancreatic carcinomas after curative resection and identified prognostic factors related to pancreatic carcinoma after multidisciplinary treatment strategies. MATERIAL AND METHODS Pancreatic carcinoma patients (n=61) who received adjuvant radiotherapy after resection (median dose, 50.4 Gy) between 2010 and 2016 were retrospectively identified. Sixty patients received chemotherapy, including concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), systemic chemotherapy, and regional intra-arterial infusion chemotherapy (RIAC). The Kaplan-Meier method was used to measure the 3-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates. Log-rank univariate analysis and multivariate Cox regression model analysis were used to identify prognostic factors. RESULTS Median follow-up time was 25.5 (range, 4.9-59.7) months. The 3-year OS and DFS rates were 31.0% and 16.1%, respectively. The median OS and DFS were 27.4 and 16.7 months, respectively. Multivariate analysis indicated that independent favorable predictors for OS were CCRT (p=0.039) and postoperative RIAC (p=0.044). Moreover, postoperative RIAC (p=0.027), and pre-radiotherapy CA19-9 ≤37 U/mL (p=0.0080) were independent favorable predictors for DFS. The combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy was tolerated well by the patients, and no treatment-related death occurred. CONCLUSIONS Combined IMRT and adjuvant chemotherapy appeared safe and effective for pancreatic carcinoma. CCRT was associated with improved survival with acceptable toxicity. We propose that radiotherapy could be a part of postoperative treatment, but it should be administered concurrently with chemotherapy. Adding RIAC was associated with improved OS and DFS and it could be integrated into the postoperative treatment regimen.

Long-term results and recurrence patterns from SCALOP: a phase II randomised trial of gemcitabine- or capecitabine-based chemoradiation for locally advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

SCALOP, a randomised, phase II trial, tested the activity and safety of gemcitabine (GEM)-based and capecitabine (CAP)-based chemoradiation (CRT) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Here we present the long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Eligibility: histologically proven LAPC ⩽7 cm. Following 12 weeks of induction GEMCAP chemotherapy (three cycles: GEM 1000 mg m-2 days 1, 8, 15; CAP 830 mg m-2 days 1-21 q28 days) patients with stable/responding disease, tumour ⩽6 cm, and WHO Performance Status 0-1 were randomised to receive one cycle GEMCAP followed by CAP (830 mg m-2 b.d. on weekdays only) or GEM (300 mg m-2 weekly) with radiation (50.4 Gy per 28 fractions).

RESULTS

One-hundred fourteen patients (28 UK centres) were registered between 24 December 2009 and 25 October 2011, and 74 were randomised (CAP-RT=36; GEM-RT=38). At the time of this analysis, 105 of the 114 patients had died and the surviving 9 patients had been followed up for a median of 10.9 months (IQR: 2.9-18.7). Updated median OS was 17.6 months (95% CI: 14.6-22.7) in the CAP-CRT arm and 14.6 months (95% CI: 11.1-16.0) in the GEM-CRT arm (intention-to-treat adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 0.68 (95% CI: 0.38-1.21, P=0.185)); median progression-free survival (PFS) was 12.0 months (95% CI: 10.0-15.2) in the CAP-CRT arm and 10.4 months (95% CI: 8.8-12.7) in the GEM-CRT arm (intention-to-treat adjusted HR: 0.60 (95% CI: 0.32-1.14, P=0.120)). In baseline multivariable model, age ⩾65 years, better performance status, CA19.9<613 IU l-1, and shorter tumour diameter predicted improved OS. CAP-CRT, age ⩾65 years, better performance status, CA19.9 <46 IU ml-1 predicted improved OS and PFS in the pre-radiotherapy model. Nine-month PFS was highly predictive of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

CAP-CRT remains the superior regimen. SCALOP showed that patients with CA19.9 <46 IU ml-1 after induction chemotherapy are more likely to benefit from CRT.

Dose escalation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients receiving chemoradiotherapy

PURPOSE

To investigate whether radiotherapy (RT) dose escalation would improve treatment outcomes without increasing severe toxicity in locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

From 2005 to 2015, 497 locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients who received neoadjuvant or definitive chemoradiotherapy (CCRT) were included. Patients were divided according to the total dose (TD). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), local failure-free rate (LFFR), distant failure-free rate (DFFR), and toxicity rates were compared between <61Gy (n=345) and ≥61Gy groups (n=152). Additionally, propensity score matching was performed.

RESULTS

At a median follow-up of 19.3months (range, 4.8-128.5months), the 1-year OS, PFS, LFFR, and DFFR were significantly higher in the ≥61Gy group. After multivariate analysis, a TD of ≥61Gy remained a significant favorable factor for OS (p=0.019), PFS (p=0.001), LFFR (p=0.004), and DFFR (p=0.008). After propensity score matching, the ≥61Gy group still showed higher OS, PFS, and LFFR, but not DFFR (p=0.205). The acute and late toxicity rates showed no significant difference between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients who received a higher RT dose showed not only improved PFS and LFFR, but also improved OS without an increase in severe toxicity. Dose-escalated CCRT can be a favorable treatment option in locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients.

Induction Chemotherapy with Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Followed by Simultaneous Integrated Boost-Intensity Modulated Radiotherapy with Concurrent Gemcitabine for Locally Advanced Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: Results from a Feasibility Study

PURPOSE

This study assessed the feasibility and compliance of induction chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin followed by simultaneous integrated boost-intensity modulated radiotherapy (SIB-IMRT) with concurrent gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this trial, patients received induction chemotherapy consisting of gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m2) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, and 15 of each treatment cycle. Patients were subsequently treated with gemcitabine (300 mg/m2/wk) during SIB-IMRT. The patients received total doses of 55 and 44 Gy in 22 fractions to planning target volume 1 and 2, respectively. As an ancillary study, digital polymerase chain reaction was performed to screen for the seven most common mutations in codons 12 and 13 of the KRAS oncogene of circulating cell free DNA (cfDNA).

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were enrolled between 2012 and 2015. Of these, 33 (75%) completed the treatment. The most common toxicities during induction chemotherapy were grades 3 and 4 neutropenia (18.2%), grade 3 nausea (6.8%) and vomiting (6.8%). The most common toxicities during SIB-IMRT were grade 3 neutropenia (24.2%) and grade 3 anemia (12.1%). Ten patients (23%) underwent a curative resection after therapy. Median overall survival was significantly longer in patients who underwent curative resection (16.8 months vs. 11 months, p < 0.01). The median cfDNA concentration was significantly lower after treatment (108.5 ng/mL vs. 18.4 ng/mL, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Induction chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin followed by concurrent SIB-IMRT was well tolerated and active.

Analysis of Predictors of Resection and Survival in Locally Advanced Stage III Pancreatic Cancer: Does the Nature of Chemotherapy Regimen Influence Outcomes?

BACKGROUND

Locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC) historically portends a poor prognosis. FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel have proven effective in the metastatic setting. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of these regimens compared with older regimens in LAPC.

METHODS

A retrospective, single institutional review of all consecutive LAPC treated with "new" (FOLFIRINOX and/or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) and "old" (gemcitabine or 5-FU) chemotherapy from 2010 to 2014 was performed. Univariate and multivariate predictors of resection and survival were determined.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients (new chemotherapy = 61, old chemotherapy = 31) were analyzed, of which 19 (21%) underwent eventual resection (median overall survival [OS] = 32 vs. 14.3 months for unresected patients, P = 0.0002). For the overall cohort, resection (hazard ratio [HR] 0.261, P = 0.014), radiation therapy (HR 0.458, P = 0.004), number of lines of chemotherapy (HR 0.486, P = 0.012), and new chemotherapy (HR 0.593 vs. old regimens, P = 0.065) were independent predictors of OS on multivariate analyses (MVA). On MVA, predictors of eventual resection were head and neck tumors (OR 0.307, P = 0.033) or SMA involvement (OR 0.285, P = 0.023). In nonresected patients (73), MVA showed treatment with new chemotherapy (HR 0.452, P = 0.006), radiation (HR 0.459, P = 0.006), and number of lines of CT (HR 0.705, P = 0.013) to be predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

In LAPC, use of FOLFIRNOX and/or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel is associated with improved survival compared with older chemotherapy regimens, regardless of eventual resection. Tumor location and relationship to certain vasculature are important determinants of resection in this cohort.

SEOM Clinical Guideline for the treatment of pancreatic cancer (2016)

Pancreatic cancer remains an aggressive disease with a 5 year survival rate of 5%. Only 15% of patients with pancreatic cancer are eligible for radical surgery. Evidence suggests a benefit on survival with adjuvant chemotherapy (gemcitabine o fluourouracil) after R1/R0 resection. Adjuvant chemoradiotherapy is also a valid option in patients with positive margins. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as the involvement of the mesenteric vasculature with a limited extension. These tumors are technically resectable, but with a high risk of positive margins. Neoadjuvant treatment represents the best option for achieving an R0 resection. In advanced disease, two new chemotherapy treatment schemes (Folfirinox or Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel) have showed improvements in overall survival compared with gemcitabine alone. Progress in pancreatic cancer treatment will require a better knowledge of the molecular biology of this disease, focusing on personalized cancer therapies in the near future.

Progression-free survival as a surrogate for overall survival in first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Overall survival (OS), as the primary end-point in first-line chemotherapy trials, requires a prolonged follow-up time and may be confounded by subsequent regimens. This study aimed to evaluate the correlation between OS and surrogate end-points (progression-free survival [PFS], response rate and disease control rate), and to identify a potential surrogate for OS in advanced pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Based on an electronic search, we identified randomized controlled phase II and III trials of first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer. Correlation analyses were performed between surrogate end-points and OS, and between improvements in surrogates and those in OS.

RESULTS

Fifty trials (II/II-III/III, 17/2/31) with 111 treatment arms were identified, and 15,906 patients were analysed. PFS was most strongly correlated with OS (correlation coefficient, 0.76). Weighted linear regression models revealed the greatest determinant coefficient of 0.84 between the hazard ratio (HR) of the experimental arms compared with the control arms of PFS and that of OS. The approximate equation was log HROS = 0.01 + 0.77 × log HRPFS, indicating that risk reduction of OS via chemotherapy would translate into a 77% risk reduction of PFS. The surrogacy of PFS for OS was robust throughout our subgroup analyses: e.g., biologic versus non-biologic regimens, locally advanced versus metastatic disease.

CONCLUSIONS

The surrogacy of PFS for OS in pancreatic cancer was validated. Therefore, the use of PFS as the primary end-point in clinical trials could facilitate the early introduction of new effective chemotherapy regimens into clinical practice.

Prognostic relevance of molecular subtypes and master regulators in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Background

Pancreatic cancer is poorly characterized at genetic and non-genetic levels. The current study evaluates in a large cohort of patients the prognostic relevance of molecular subtypes and key transcription factors in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

We performed gene expression analysis of whole-tumor tissue obtained from 118 surgically resected PDAC and 13 histologically normal pancreatic tissue samples. Cox regression models were used to study the effect on survival of molecular subtypes and 16 clinicopathological prognostic factors. In order to better understand the biology of PDAC we used iRegulon to identify transcription factors (TFs) as master regulators of PDAC and its subtypes.

Results

We confirmed the PDAssign gene signature as classifier of PDAC in molecular subtypes with prognostic relevance. We found molecular subtypes, but not clinicopathological factors, as independent predictors of survival. Regulatory network analysis predicted that HNF1A/B are among thousand TFs the top enriched master regulators of the genes expressed in the normal pancreatic tissue compared to the PDAC regulatory network. On immunohistochemistry staining of PDAC samples, we observed low expression of HNF1B in well differentiated towards no expression in poorly differentiated PDAC samples. We predicted IRF/STAT, AP-1, and ETS-family members as key transcription factors in gene signatures downstream of mutated KRAS.

Conclusions

PDAC can be classified in molecular subtypes that independently predict survival. HNF1A/B seem to be good candidates as master regulators of pancreatic differentiation, which at the protein level loses its expression in malignant ductal cells of the pancreas, suggesting its putative role as tumor suppressor in pancreatic cancer.

Trial registration

The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under the number NCT01116791 (May 3, 2010).

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2540-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

[Radiation therapy of pancreatic cancer]

Currently, the use of radiation therapy for patients with pancreatic cancer is subject to discussion. In adjuvant setting, the standard treatment is 6 months of chemotherapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine. Chemoradiation (CRT) may improve the survival of patients with incompletely resected tumors (R1). This should be confirmed by a prospective trial. Neoadjuvant CRT is a promising treatment especially for patients with borderline resectable tumors. For patients with locally advanced tumors, there is no a standard. An induction chemotherapy followed by CRT for non-progressive patients reduces the rate of local relapse. Whereas in the first trials of CRT large fields were used, the treated volumes have been reduced to improve tolerance. Tumor movements induced by breathing should be taken in account. Intensity modulated radiation therapy allows a reduction of doses to the organs at risk. Whereas widely used, this technique is not recommended.

Management of radiation and chemotherapy related acute toxicity in gastrointestinal cancer

Possible toxic effects following radiation and chemotherapy of gastrointestinal tumours may cause a depletion of the mucosal barrier within the radiation volumes with severe mucositis. Diarrhoea, nausea, emesis and severe malabsorption followed by infections with dehydration and electrolyte disorders have to be encountered. For prevention and treatment of oropharyngeal mucositis an oral care protocol, oral cryotherapy together with benzydamine mouthwash may be recommended. Lower gastrointestinal diarrhoea is best treated by Octreotide (>100 μg s.c. bid) if loperamide is ineffective and amifostine (340 mg/m(2) IV) to prevent radiation proctitis. Enteral nutrition may be necessary with severe malnutrition or no enteral food intake for >7days or insufficient intake (<60%) for >10 days. With severe generalized mucositis or severe radiation induced enteritis parenteral nutrition will be initiated. Following the application of highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimen, 5-HT3 antagonists, dexamethasone and aprepitant, whereas in moderate risk levels 5-HT3 antagonist plus dexamethasone may be sufficient.

Locally Advanced, Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncologists and others for treatment of patients with locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, gastroenterology, palliative care, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic review of the literature from January 2002 to June 2015. Outcomes included overall survival, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Twenty-six randomized controlled trials met the systematic review criteria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A multiphase computed tomography scan of the chest, abdomen, and pelvis should be performed. Baseline performance status and comorbidity profile should be evaluated. The goals of care, patient preferences, psychological status, support systems, and symptoms should guide decisions for treatments. A palliative care referral should occur at first visit. Initial systemic chemotherapy (6 months) with a combination regimen is recommended for most patients (for some patients radiation therapy may be offered up front) with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 and a favorable comorbidity profile. There is no clear evidence to support one regimen over another. The gemcitabine-based combinations and treatments recommended in the metastatic setting (eg, fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin and gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel) have not been evaluated in randomized controlled trials involving locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer. If there is local disease progression after induction chemotherapy, without metastasis, then radiation therapy or stereotactic body radiotherapy may be offered also with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤ 2 and an adequate comorbidity profile. If there is stable disease after 6 months of induction chemotherapy but unacceptable toxicities, radiation therapy may be offered as an alternative. Patients with disease progression should be offered treatment per the ASCO Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Treatment Guideline. Follow-up visits every 3 to 4 months are recommended. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/guidelines/LAPC and www.asco.org/guidelines/MetPC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

Pancreatic cancer chemoradiotherapy

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal gastrointestinal tumour. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of therapy in the majority of the patients whereas resection is the only chance of cure but only possible in 15-20% of all patients. The integration of radiotherapy into multimodal treatment concepts is heavily investigated. It is now commonly accepted that induction chemotherapy should precede radiotherapy. When fractionated conventionally it should be given as chemoradiotherapy. Recently, stereotactic body radiotherapy emerged as an alternative, but will have to be carefully investigated in clinical trials. This review aims to give an overview of radiotherapeutic strategies with a focus on the latest developments in the field in the context of chemotherapy and surgery.

Comparison of investigator-delineated gross tumour volumes and quality assurance in pancreatic cancer: Analysis of the on-trial cases for the SCALOP trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We performed a retrospective central review of tumour outlines in patients undergoing radiotherapy in the SCALOP trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The planning CT scans were reviewed retrospectively by a central review team, and the accuracy of investigators' GTV (iGTV) and PTV (iPTV) was compared to the trials team-defined gold standard (gsGTV and gsPTV) using the Jaccard Conformity Index (JCI) and Geographical Miss Index (GMI). The prognostic value of JCI and GMI was also assessed. The RT plans were also reviewed against protocol-defined constraints.

RESULTS

60 patients with diagnostic-quality planning scans were included. The median whole volume JCI for GTV was 0.64 (IQR: 0.43-0.82), and the median GMI was 0.11 (IQR: 0.05-0.22). For PTVs, the median JCI and GMI were 0.80 (IQR: 0.71-0.88) and 0.04 (IQR: 0.02-0.12) respectively. Tumour was completely missed in 1 patient, and⩾50% of the tumour was missed in 3. Patients with JCI for GTV⩾0.7 had 7.12 (95% CIs: 1.83-27.67, p=0.005) higher odds of progressing by 9months in multivariate analysis. Major deviations in RT planning were noted in 4.5% of cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiotherapy workshops and real-time central review of contours are required in RT trials of pancreatic cancer.

The rationale of combined radiotherapy and chemotherapy - Joint action of Castor and Pollux

This article aims to review the rationale behind the combination of radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Theoretical concepts describing the principles of the joint effects of chemoradiotherapy are reviewed. Preclinical and clinical evidence are collected and summarised demonstrating the co-operation between the two modalities which form the mainstay of the treatment of most solid tumours. Initially, the evolution of chemoradiotherapy was mostly empirically driven which is true for both, the early studies and the experimental investigations, rather than relying on scientific rationale. To date, the revised Steel's model proposes five mechanisms, spatial cooperation, cytotoxic enhancement, biological co-operation, temporary modulation and normal tissue protection to describe the interaction between radiotherapy and chemotherapy. Chemoradiotherapy has become the standard modality for most patients with locally advanced solid tumours due to better control of loco-regional disease and prolonged survival. Gradually, molecular prediction of efficacy is integrated such as MGMT status for combining temozolomide with radiotherapy in glioblastoma. As molecular targeted drugs are ready to be taken into triple combinations with chemoradiotherapy it is crucial to have a good understanding of the mechanisms of chemoradiotherapy for the rational development of future combinations.

Chemotherapeutic agents for GI tumor chemoradiotherapy overview of chemotherapeutic agents to be combined with radiotherapy in the GI tract and their potential as radiosensitizers

In the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors, simultaneous radiochemotherapy plays an important role. It is one of the principles of simultaneous radiochemotherapy, applying only chemotherapeutic agents simultaneously to radiation, which are primarily effective in the treated tumor entity, therefore a lot of different agents, like antimetabolites, mostly 5-fluorouracil, platinum derivates (mostly cisplatinum and oxaliplatin), mitomycin C and taxanes are used in simultaneous radiochemotherapy. Most of these have also radiation-intensifying effects. The mechanisms and interactions with ionizing radiation are presented in the article.

Phase 1B trial of Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, capecitabine, and cisplatin (PAXG regimen) in patients with unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine combination significantly improved overall survival over gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A phase 1b trial was performed (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01730222) to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of nab-paclitaxel in combination with cisplatin, capecitabine, and gemcitabine at fixed dose (800, 30, and 1250 mg m(-2) every 2 weeks, respectively; PAXG regimen).

METHODS

Nab-paclitaxel doses were escalated from 100 (level one) to 125 (level two) and 150 mg m(-2) (level three) every 2 weeks in cohorts of 3-6 patients with pathologically confirmed unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

RESULTS

Between Dec 2012 and Apr 2014, 24 patients were enroled (3 at level one, 5 at level two, 16 at level three) and received 117 cycles of PAXG. No dose-limiting toxicity occurred and level three was the RP2D. At this dose, nab-paclitaxel dose-intensity was 91%. Worse per patient grade 3/4 toxicity were neutropenia 25/31%; fatigue 19%; anaemia and hand-foot syndrome 12%, nausea 6%, and febrile neutropenia 6%. A partial response (PR) was observed in 16 (67%) and stable disease (SD) in 8 patients (33%). Among 21 patients with a baseline positive positron emission tomography (PET) scan, a complete metabolic response was observed in 9 (43%), PR in 10 (48%), SD in 2. CA19-9 decreased by ⩾49% in all the 19 patients with elevated basal value. Six patients were resected after chemotherapy. Progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6) was 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

The RP2D of nab-paclitaxel in the PAXG regimen was 150 mg m(-2) every 2 weeks. The preliminary results are promising and warrant further exploration.

Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Versus Chemotherapy Alone for Unresectable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

The optimal treatment strategy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), particularly the role of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CCRT), remains debatable. We compared the clinical outcomes of CCRT and palliative chemotherapy alone (CA) in patients with unresectable LAPC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with LAPC who were consecutively treated between 2003 and 2010 were included. Resectability was evaluated according to National Comprehensive Cancer Network ver. 1.2012. The clinical outcomes for each treatment group (CCRT vs. CA) were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

Sixty-three patients (58.9%) and 44 patients (41.1%) were treated with CCRT and CA, respectively. The CCRT cohort included patients who were treated with CCRT with or without chemotherapy backbone (CCRT alone, induction chemotherapy-CCRT, CCRT-maintenance chemotherapy, and induction-CCRT-maintenance chemotherapy). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of all patients were 7.2 months and 13.1 months. PFS of the CCRT and CA groups was 9.0 months and 4.4 months, respectively (p=0.020). OS of the CCRT and CA groups was 15.4 months and 9.3 months, respectively (p=0.011). In multivariate analysis, the adjusted hazard ratio of CCRT was 0.536 (p=0.003) for OS and 0.667 (p=0.078) for PFS. Although the pattern of failure was similar in the CCRT and CA groups, the times to both local and distant failure were significantly longer in the CCRT group.

CONCLUSION

In patients with unresectable LAPC, those who underwent CCRT during their entire treatment courses had longer OS than patients treated with chemotherapy alone.

Hypofractionated Conformal Radiotherapy with Concurrent Full-Dose Gemcitabine Versus Standard Fractionation Radiotherapy with Concurrent Fluorouracil for Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: a Multi-Institution Experience

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE(S)

The purpose of this study was to compare oncologic outcomes and toxicity profile of hypofractionated conformal radiotherapy (RT) with concurrent full-dose gemcitabine versus standard fractionation RT with concurrent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in the treatment of unresectable non-metastatic pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients with unresectable non-metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas treated at three institutions were included. All patients were treated with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) consisting of either hypofractionated RT to the gross disease concurrent with a full-dose gemcitabine-based regimen versus standard fractionation RT to the tumor and elective nodes concurrent with 5-FU. End points included rates of gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities, overall survival (OS), and distant metastasis free survival (DMFS).

RESULTS

From January 1999 to December 2009, 170 patients were identified (118 RT/gemcitabine, 52 RT/5-FU). There were no differences in demographic or clinical factors. Acute GI toxicities (grades <3 versus ≥3) were 82.2 and 17.8 %, respectively, for patients treated with RT/gemcitabine and 78.9 and 21.2 % for those treated with RT/5-FU (p = 0.67). Late GI toxicities (grades <3 versus ≥3) were 88.1 and 11.9 %, respectively, for RT/gemcitabine and 80.8 and 19.2 % for RT/5-FU (p = 0.23). OS for RT/gemcitabine and RT/5-FU were 52 versus 36 % at 1 year and 14 versus 6 % at 2 years favoring the RT/gemcitabine group (p = 0.02). DMFS at 1 and 2 years for RT/gemcitabine were 41 and 11 % versus 24 and 4 % for RT/5-FU (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

RT/gemcitabine was equivalent in toxicity to RT/5-FU but was associated with superior OS and DMFS. When RT is used in the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer, hypofractionated conformal RT with concurrent full-dose gemcitabine may be the preferred approach.

Recent Advances and Prospects for Multimodality Therapy in Pancreatic Cancer

The outcomes for treatment of pancreatic cancer have not improved dramatically in many decades. However, the recent promising results with combination chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease increase optimism for future treatments. With greater control of overt or occult metastatic disease, there will likely be an expanding role for local treatment modalities, especially given that nearly a third of pancreatic cancer patients have locally destructive disease without distant metastatic disease at the time of death. Technical advances have allowed for the safe delivery of dose-escalated radiation therapy, which can then be combined with chemotherapy, targeted agents, immunotherapy, and nanoparticulate drug delivery techniques to produce novel and improved synergistic effects. Here we discuss recent advances and future directions for multimodality therapy in pancreatic cancer.

Ablation Strategies for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

With the advent of novel and somewhat effective chemotherapy against pancreas cancer, several groups developed a new interest on locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Unresectable tumors constitute up to 80% of pancreatic cancer (PC) at the time of diagnosis and are associated with a 5-year overall survival of less than 5%. To control those tumors locally, with perhaps improved patients survival, significant advances were made over the last 2 decades in the development of ablation methods including cryoablation, radiofrequency ablation, microwave ablation, high intensity focused ultrasound and irreversible electroporation (IRE). Many suggested a call for caution for possible severe or lethal complications in using such techniques on the pancreas. Most fears were on the heating or freezing of the pancreas, while non-thermal ablation (IRE) could offer safer approaches. The multimodal therapies along with high-resolution imaging guidance have created some enthusiasm toward ablation for LAPC. The impact of ablation techniques on primarily non-resectable PC remains, however, unclear.

ARCII: A phase II trial of the HIV protease inhibitor Nelfinavir in combination with chemoradiation for locally advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Nelfinavir can enhance intrinsic radiosensitivity, reduce hypoxia and improve vascularity. We conducted a phase II trial combining nelfinavir with chemoradiotherapy (CRT) for locally advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Radiotherapy (50.4Gy/28 fractions; boost to 59.4Gy/33 fractions) was administered with weekly gemcitabine and cisplatin. Nelfinavir started 3-10days before and was continued during CRT. The primary end-point was 1-year overall survival (OS). Secondary end-points included histological downstaging, radiological response, 1-year progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and treatment toxicity. An imaging sub-study (n=6) evaluated hypoxia ((18)F-Fluoromisonidazole-PET) and perfusion (perfusion CT) during induction nelfinavir.

RESULTS

The study closed after recruiting 23 patients, due to non-availability of Nelfinavir in Europe. The 1-year OS was 73.4% (90% CI: 54.5-85.5%) and median OS was 17.4months (90% CI: 12.8-18.8). The 1-year PFS was 21.8% (90% CI: 8.9-38.3%) and median PFS was 5.5months (90% CI: 4.1-8.3). All patients experienced Grade 3/4 toxicity, but many were asymptomatic laboratory abnormalities. Four of 6 patients on the imaging sub-study demonstrated reduced hypoxia and increased perfusion post-nelfinavir.

CONCLUSIONS

CRT combined with nelfinavir showed acceptable toxicity and promising survival in pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant radiotherapeutic strategies in pancreatic cancer

This review summarizes the current status of neoadjuvant radiation approaches in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, including a description of modern radiation techniques, and an overview on the literature regarding neoadjuvant radio- or radiochemotherapeutic strategies both for resectable and irresectable pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant chemoradiation for locally-advanced, primarily non- or borderline resectable pancreas cancer results in secondary resectability in a substantial proportion of patients with consecutively markedly improved overall prognosis and should be considered as possible alternative in pretreatment multidisciplinary evaluations. In resectable pancreatic cancer, outstanding results in terms of response, local control and overall survival have been observed with neoadjuvant radio- or radiochemotherapy in several phase I/II trials, which justify further evaluation of this strategy. Further investigation of neoadjuvant chemoradiation strategies should be performed preferentially in randomized trials in order to improve comparability of the current results with other treatment modalities. This should include the evaluation of optimal sequencing with newer and more potent systemic induction therapy approaches. Advances in patient selection based on new molecular markers might be of crucial interest in this context. Finally modern external beam radiation techniques (intensity-modulated radiation therapy, image-guided radiation therapy and stereotactic body radiation therapy), new radiation qualities (protons, heavy ions) or combinations with alternative boosting techniques widen the therapeutic window and contribute to the reduction of toxicity.

Current standards and new innovative approaches for treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains a devastating disease with a 5-year survival rate not exceeding 6%. Treatment of this disease remains a major challenge. This article reviews the state-of-the-art in the management of this disease and the new innovative approaches that may help to accelerate progress in treating its victims. After careful pre-therapeutic evaluation, only 15-20% of patients diagnosed with a pancreatic cancer (PC) are eligible for upfront radical surgery. After R0 or R1 resection in such patients, evidence suggests a significantly positive impact on survival of adjuvant chemotherapy comprising 6 months of gemcitabine or fluorouracil/folinic acid. Delayed adjuvant chemoradiation is considered as an option in cases of positive margins. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is defined as a tumour involving the mesenteric vasculature to a limited extend. Resection of these tumours is technically feasible, yet runs the high risk of a R1 resection. Neoadjuvant treatment probably offers the best chance of achieving successful R0 resection and long-term survival, but the best treatment options should be determined in prospective randomised studies. Gemcitabine has for 15 years been the only validated therapy for advanced PC. Following decades of negative phase III studies, increasing evidence now suggests that further significant improvements to overall survival can be achieved via either Folfirinox or gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel regimens. Progress in systemic therapy may improve the chances of resection in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) or locally advanced PC. This requires first enhancing knowledge of the genetic events driving carcinogenesis, which may then be translated into clinical studies.

The role of neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a review

Controversy remains regarding neoadjuvant approaches in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over adjuvant therapy including earlier delivery of systemic treatment, in vivo assessment of response, increased resectability rate in borderline resectable patients and increased margin-negative resection rate. At present, there are no randomized data favoring neoadjuvant over adjuvant therapy and multiple neoadjuvant approaches are under investigation. Combination chemotherapy regimens including 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin, gemcitabine with or without abraxane, or docetaxel and capecitabine have been used in the neoadjuvant setting. Radiation and chemoradiation have also been incorporated into neoadjuvant strategies, and delivery of alternative fractionation regimens is being explored. This review provides an overview of neoadjuvant therapies for pancreatic cancer.

Contemporary Management of Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer

Adenocarcinoma of the pancreas remains a highly lethal disease, with less than 5% survival at 5 years. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC) account for approximately 30% of newly diagnosed cases of PC. The objective of BRPC therapy is to downstage the tumor to allow resection; the objective of LAPC therapy is to control disease and improve survival. There is no consensus on the definitions of BRPC and LAPC, which leads to major limitations in designing clinical trials and evaluating their results. A multimodality approach is always needed to ensure proper utilization and timing of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery in the management of this disease. Combination chemotherapy regimens (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, and gemcitabine [FOLFIRINOX] and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) have improved overall survival in metastatic disease. The role of combination chemotherapy regimens in BRPC and LAPC is an area of active investigation. There is no consensus on the dose, modality, and role of radiation therapy in the treatment of BRPC and LAPC. This article reviews the literature and highlights the areas of controversy regarding management of BRPC and LAPC.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Pancreatic cancer is one of the worst cancers with regard to survival, even at early stages of the disease. This review evaluates all the evidence for the stages in which the cancer is not primarily resectable with surgery, known as borderline resectable or locally advanced unresectable. Recently, advancements in radiation techniques and use of better combination chemotherapies have improved survival and tolerance. There is no consensus on description of stages or treatment sequences (chemotherapy, chemoradiation, radiation), nor on the best chemotherapy regimen. The evidence behind the treatment paradigm for these stages of pancreatic cancer is summarized.

Localized Pancreatic Cancer: Multidisciplinary Management

Pancreatic cancer is an aggressive cancer that continues to have single-digit 5-year mortality rates despite advancements in the field. Surgery remains the only curative treatment; however, most patients present with late-stage disease deemed unresectable, either due to extensive local vascular involvement or the presence of distant metastasis. Resection guidelines that include a borderline resectable group, as well as advancements in neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation that improve resectability of locally advanced disease, may improve outcomes for patients with more invasive disease. Multi-agent chemotherapy regimens fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) and nab-paclitaxel with gemcitabine improved response rates and survival in metastatic pancreatic cancer and are now being used in earlier stages for patients with localized potentially resectable and unresectable disease, with goals of downstaging tumors to allow margin-negative resection and reducing systemic recurrence. Chemoradiotherapy, although still controversial for both resectable and unresectable pancreatic cancer, is being used in the context of contemporary chemotherapy backbone regimens, and novel radiation techniques such as stereotactic body frame radiation therapy (SBRT) are studied on the premise of maintaining or improving efficacy and reducing treatment duration. Patient selection for optimal treatment designation is currently provided by multidisciplinary tumor boards, but biomarker discovery, in blood, tumors, or through novel imaging, is an area of intense research. Results to date suggest that some patients with unresectable disease at the outset have survival rates as good as those with initially resectable disease if able to undergo surgical resection. Long-term follow-up and improved clinical trials options are needed to determine optimal treatment modalities for patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

International Association of Pancreatology (IAP)/European Pancreatic Club (EPC) consensus review of guidelines for the treatment of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most devastating diseases with an extremely high mortality. Medical organizations and scientific societies have published a number of guidelines to address active treatment of pancreatic cancer. The aim of this consensus review was to identify where there is agreement or disagreement among the existing guidelines and to help define the gaps for future studies.

METHODS

A panel of expert pancreatologists gathered at the 46th European Pancreatic Club Meeting combined with the 18th International Association of Pancreatology Meeting and collaborated on critical reviews of eight English language guidelines for the clinical management of pancreatic cancer. Clinical questions (CQs) of interest were proposed by specialists in each of nine areas. The recommendations for the CQs in existing guidelines, as well as the evidence on which these were based, were reviewed and compared. The evidence was graded as sufficient, mediocre or poor/absent.

RESULTS

Only 4 of the 36 CQs, had sufficient evidence for agreement. There was also agreement in five additional CQs despite the lack of sufficient evidence. In 22 CQs, there was disagreement regardless of the presence or absence of evidence. There were five CQs that were not addressed adequately by existing guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The existing guidelines provide both evidence- and consensus-based recommendations. There is also considerable disagreement about the recommendations in part due to the lack of high level evidence. Improving the clinical management of patients with pancreatic cancer, will require continuing efforts to undertake research that will provide sufficient evidence to allow agreement.

Clinical effects of stereotactic radiotherapy combined with gemcitabine in treatment of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma

AIM: To evaluate the clinical effects of stereotactic conformal radiotherapy combined with gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma.

METHODS: A total of 118 patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma were divided into two groups to receive either radiotherapy combined with gemcitabine (group A, 56 cases) or radiotherapy alone (group B, 62 cases). The standard dose of stereotactic conformal radiotherapy prescribed was 35-45 Gy to the 50%-65% isodose curve. The total dose was delivered over 10-13 d with a fraction dose of 2.8-3.5 Gy and 6 fractions per week. Concomitant chemotherapy started at the first day of radiotherapy: gemcitabine at a dose of 600 mg/m² was given on days 1 and 8, and adjuvant chemotherapy was administered three weeks after radiotherapy at a dose of gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² on days 1 and 8, 21 days per cycle, for 4-6 cycles continuously.

RESULTS: The patients underwent CT or MR examination 2 mo after 2 treatment. The tumor response rate of group A was 67.8% (38/56). Median survival time was 12.8 mo (range, 4-70 mo). The overall 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 58.9% (33/56) and 28.6% (16/56), respectively. Main side effects included leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, nausea and vomiting. The tumor response rate of group B was 30.6% (19/62). Median survival time was 8.5 mo (range, 5-56 mo). The overall 1-year and 2-year survival rates were 33.9% (21/66) and 12.9% (8/62), respectively. Main side effects were leukopenia and thrombocytopenia. Both the short-term and long-term therapeutic effects were better in the combination group than in the radiotherapy alone group.

CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine combined with stereotactic conformal radiotherapy is effective and safe in the treatment of patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma.

Long-Term Progression-Free Survival in a Patient with Locally Advanced, Unresectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is amongst the most lethal malignancies with dismal five-year survival rates. Surgical excision is the mainstay of therapy and unresectable disease is considered incurable. Herein, we describe a patient with unresectable, advanced stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma with a remarkable clinical course following definitive chemoradiotherapy.

Prospective study of cetuximab and gemcitabine in combination with radiation therapy: feasibility and efficacy in locally advanced pancreatic head cancer

Background

Radio-chemotherapy is one of the steps of multidisciplinary management in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) plays an important role in the disease pathway. The purpose of this prospective study is to evaluate the feasibility and the efficacy of radiotherapy in combination with gemcitabine and EGFR targeting therapy for patients with locally advanced disease.

Materials and methods

From November 2008 through January 2012, 34 patients were included in this study. In all cases an accurate pre-treatment staging including CT scan, Endoscopic Ultra-Sonography (EUS), 18F - fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET-CT and laparoscopy with peritoneal washing was performed. External beam radiation was delivered with a total dose of 50.4 Gy (1.8 Gy per fraction). Patients were treated using 3D- conformal radiotherapy, and the clinical target volume was the primary tumor and involved lymph nodes. Gemcitabine 300 mg/m² and Cetuximab were given weekly during radiation therapy.

Results

Ten patients (29.4 %) were excluded from the protocol because of the evidence of metastatic disease at the pre-treatment staging. Three patients refused radiochemotherapy. Twenty-one patients completed the therapy protocol. During the combined therapy grade 3–4 toxicities observed were only haematological (leukopenia 47,6 %, trombocytopenia 4.8 %, elevated gamma-GT 23.8 %, elevated alkaline phosphatase 4,8 %). Non-haematological toxicity grade 3–4 was never reported. Post-treatment workup showed partial response in five patients (24 %), stable disease in 11 patients (52 %) and disease progression in 5 patients (24 %). Two-year Local Control was 49 % (median, 18.6 months), 2-year Metastases Free Survival was 24 % (median, 10.8 months). One and two-year Overall Survival were 66 % and 28 % respectively, with a median survival time of 15.3 months.

Conclusions

The combination of cetuximab and gemcitabine with concurrent radiation therapy provides a feasible and well tolerated treatment for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients’ selection is crucial in order to treat patients appropriately.

Focal Radiation Therapy Dose Escalation Improves Overall Survival in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Patients Receiving Induction Chemotherapy and Consolidative Chemoradiation

PURPOSE

To review outcomes of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients treated with dose-escalated intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) with curative intent.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A total of 200 patients with LAPC were treated with induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation between 2006 and 2014. Of these, 47 (24%) having tumors >1 cm from the luminal organs were selected for dose-escalated IMRT (biologically effective dose [BED] >70 Gy) using a simultaneous integrated boost technique, inspiration breath hold, and computed tomographic image guidance. Fractionation was optimized for coverage of gross tumor and luminal organ sparing. A 2- to 5-mm margin around the gross tumor volume was treated using a simultaneous integrated boost with a microscopic dose. Overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), local-regional and distant RFS, and time to local-regional and distant recurrence, calculated from start of chemoradiation, were the outcomes of interest.

RESULTS

Median radiation dose was 50.4 Gy (BED = 59.47 Gy) with a concurrent capecitabine-based (86%) regimen. Patients who received BED >70 Gy had a superior OS (17.8 vs 15.0 months, P=.03), which was preserved throughout the follow-up period, with estimated OS rates at 2 years of 36% versus 19% and at 3 years of 31% versus 9% along with improved local-regional RFS (10.2 vs 6.2 months, P=.05) as compared with those receiving BED ≤70 Gy. Degree of gross tumor volume coverage did not seem to affect outcomes. No additional toxicity was observed in the high-dose group. Higher dose (BED) was the only predictor of improved OS on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Radiation dose escalation during consolidative chemoradiation therapy after induction chemotherapy for LAPC patients improves OS and local-regional RFS.

Comparison of investigator-delineated gross tumor volumes and quality assurance in pancreatic cancer: Analysis of the pretrial benchmark case for the SCALOP trial

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

To evaluate the variation in investigator-delineated volumes and assess plans from the radiotherapy trial quality assurance (RTTQA) program of SCALOP, a phase II trial in locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Participating investigators (n=25) outlined a pre-trial benchmark case as per RT protocol, and the accuracy of investigators' GTV (iGTV) and PTV (iPTV) was evaluated, against the trials team-defined gold standard GTV (gsGTV) and PTV (gsPTV), using both qualitative and geometric analyses. The median Jaccard Conformity Index (JCI) and Geographical Miss Index (GMI) were calculated. Participating RT centers also submitted a radiotherapy plan for this benchmark case, which was centrally reviewed against protocol-defined constraints.

RESULTS

Twenty-five investigator-defined contours were evaluated. The median JCI and GMI of iGTVs were 0.57 (IQR: 0.51-0.65) and 0.26 (IQR: 0.15-0.40). For iPTVs, these were 0.75 (IQR: 0.71-0.79) and 0.14 (IQR: 0.11-0.22) respectively. Qualitative analysis showed largest variation at the tumor edges and failure to recognize a peri-pancreatic lymph node. There were no major protocol deviations in RT planning, but three minor PTV coverage deviations were identified. .

CONCLUSIONS

SCALOP demonstrated considerable variation in iGTV delineation. RTTQA workshops and real-time central review of delineations are needed in future trials.

Neoadjuvant multimodal treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is increasingly multidisciplinary, with neoadjuvant strategies (chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery) administered in patients with resectable, borderline resectable, or locally advanced disease. The rational supporting this management is the achievement of both higher margin-negative resections and conversion rates into potentially resectable disease and in vivo assessment of novel therapeutics. International guidelines suggest an initial staging of the disease followed by a multidisciplinary approach, even considering the lack of a treatment approach to be considered as standard in this setting. This review will focus on both literature data supporting these guidelines and on new opportunities related to current more active chemotherapy regimens. An analysis of the pathological assessment of response to therapy and the potential role of target therapies and translational biomarkers and ongoing clinical trials of significance will be discussed.