Primary systemic therapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using mFOLFIRINOX: A pilot study

Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy as an Effective Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer

Background Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) allows the delivery of an ablative radiation dose to the tumor with minimal toxicity. Although magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-guided SBRT appears to be a promising approach in the modern era, X-ray image-guided SBRT is still used worldwide for pancreatic cancer. This study aims to evaluate the results of X-ray image-guided SBRT in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Methodology Medical records of 24 patients with unresectable LAPC who underwent X-ray image-guided SBRT between 2009 and 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. SPSS version 23.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA) was utilized for all analyses. Results The median age was 64 years (range = 42-81 years), and the median tumor size was 3.5 cm (range = 2.7-4 cm). The median total dose of SBRT was 35 Gy (range = 33-50 Gy) in five fractions. After SBRT, 30% of patients showed complete and 41% showed partial response, whereas 20% had stable disease and 9% had progression. Median follow-up was 15 months (range = 6-58 months). During follow-up, four (16%) patients had local recurrence, one (4%) had a regional recurrence, and 17 (70%) had distant metastasis (DM). The two-year local control (LC), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), overall survival (OS), and DM-free survival (DMFS) rate was 87%, 36%, 37%, and 29%, respectively. In univariate analysis, a larger tumor size (>3.5 cm) and higher cancer antigen 19-9 level (>106.5 kU/L) significantly decreased the OS, LRFS, and DMFS rates. No severe acute toxicity was observed. However, two patients had severe late toxicity as intestinal bleeding. Conclusions X-ray image-guided SBRT provides a good LC rate with minimal toxicity for unresectable LAPC. However, despite modern systemic treatments, the rate of DM remains high which plays a major role in survival.

Surgeon-Led Clinical Trials in Pancreatic Cancer

The review also highlights key landmark adjuvant, neoadjuvant and perioperative trials with an emphasis on surgeon-run clinical trials that have helped to define the pancreatic cancer treatment paradigms.

Defining the Optimal Duration of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Time for a Personalized Approach?

ABSTRACT

Despite recent advances, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continues to be associated with dismal outcomes, with a cure evading most patients. While historic treatment for PDAC has been surgical resection followed by 6 months of adjuvant therapy, there has been a recent shift toward neoadjuvant treatment (NAT). Several considerations support this approach, including the characteristic early systemic spread of PDAC, and the morbidity often surrounding pancreatic resection, which can delay recovery and preclude patients from starting adjuvant treatment. The addition of NAT has been suggested to improve margin-negative resection rates, decrease lymph node positivity, and potentially translate to improved survival. Conversely, complications and disease progression can occur during preoperative treatment, potentially eliminating the chance of curative resection. As NAT utilization has increased, treatment durations have been found to vary widely between institutions with an optimal duration remaining undefined. In this review, we assess the existing literature on NAT for PDAC, reviewing treatment durations reported across retrospective case series and prospective clinical trials to establish currently used approaches and seek the optimal duration. We also analyze markers of treatment response and review the potential for personalized approaches that may help clarify this important treatment question and move NAT toward a more standardized approach.

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer. Is It Time for Pushing on It?

Pancreatic resection still represents the only curative option for patients affected by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the association with modern chemotherapy regimens is a key factor in improving the inauspicious oncological outcome. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for borderline resectable/locally advanced PDAC has been demonstrated; this evidence raises the question of whether even resectable PDAC should undergo NAT rather than upfront surgery. NAT may avoid futile surgery because of undetected distant metastases or aggressive tumor biology, providing more effective systemic control of the disease, which is hampered when adjuvant chemotherapy is delayed or precluded. However, recent data show controversial results regarding the efficacy and safety of NAT in resectable PDAC compared to upfront surgery. Although several prospective studies and meta-analyses indicate better oncologic outcomes after NAT, there are some biases, such as the methodological approaches used to capture the events of interest, which could make these results hardly reproducible. For instance, per-protocol studies, considering only the postoperative outcomes, tend to overestimate the performance of NAT by excluding patients who will never be suitable for surgery due to the development of chemotoxicity or tumor progression. To draw reliable conclusions, the studies should capture the events of interest of both strategies (NAT/upfront surgery) from the time of allocation to a specific treatment in an intention-to-treat fashion. This critical review highlights the current literature data concerning the use of NAT in resectable PDAC, summarizing the results of high-quality studies and focusing on the methodological issues of the most recent pieces of evidence.

FOLFIRINOX as Initial Treatment for Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Retrospective Analysis by the Trans-Atlantic Pancreatic Surgery Consortium

BACKGROUND

Large pragmatic studies of patients who received 5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin ([m]FOLFIRINOX) as initial treatment for localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are lacking. This study aimed to provide realistic estimates of oncologic outcomes in these patients.

METHODS

This international retrospective cohort study included all consecutive patients presenting with localized PDAC who received at least 1 cycle of (m)FOLFIRINOX as initial treatment in 5 referral centers from the United States and the Netherlands (2012-2019). Primary outcome was median overall survival (OS), calculated from the date of tissue diagnosis, assessed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Log-rank test was used to compare OS between groups. A Cox proportional hazards regression model was used to assess prognostic baseline factors for OS. All statistical tests were 2-sided.

RESULTS

Overall, 1835 patients were included, of whom 958 (52.2%) had locally advanced (LA), 531 (28.9%) had borderline resectable (BR), and 346 (18.9%) had potentially resectable (PR) PDAC. The median number of (m)FOLFIRINOX cycles was 6 (interquartile range = 4-8). Subsequent treatment included second chemotherapy (12.9%), radiotherapy (49.0%), and resection (37.9%). The resection rate was 17.6% for LA, 53.1% for BR, and 70.5% for PR PDAC (P < .001). The margin-negative resection rate (>1 mm) was 55.2% for LA, 62.6% for BR, and 79.2% for PR PDAC (P < .001). The median OS was 18.7 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = 17.7 to 19.9 months) for LA, 23.2 months (95% CI = 21.0 to 25.7 months) for BR, and 31.2 months (95% CI = 26.2 to 36.6 months) for PR PDAC (P < .001). The median OS for 695 patients who underwent a resection was 38.3 months (95% CI = 36.1 to 42.0 months). Independent prognostic factors at baseline for worse OS were more advanced stage, worse performance status, baseline carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 > 500 U/mL, and body mass index ≤18.5 kg/m2.

CONCLUSIONS

This large international cohort study provides realistic estimates of resection rates and survival in patients with LA, BR, and PR PDAC who started (m)FOLFIRINOX treatment in PDAC referral centers.

Added Value of Radiotherapy Following Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The added value of radiotherapy following neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer ((B)RPC) is unclear. The objective of this meta-analysis was to compare outcomes of patients who received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX alone or combined with radiotherapy.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in Embase, Medline (ovidSP), Web of Science, Scopus, Cochrane, and Google Scholar. The primary endpoint was pooled median overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included resection rate, R0 resection rate, and other pathologic outcomes.

Results

We included 512 patients with (B)RPC from 15 studies, of which 7 were prospective nonrandomized studies. In total, 351 patients (68.6%) were treated with FOLFIRINOX alone (8 studies) and 161 patients (31.4%) were treated with FOLFIRINOX and radiotherapy (7 studies). The pooled estimated median OS was 21.6 months (range 18.4–34.0 months) for FOLFIRINOX alone and 22.4 months (range 11.0–37.7 months) for FOLFIRINOX with radiotherapy. The pooled resection rate was similar (71.9% vs. 63.1%, p = 0.43) and the pooled R0 resection rate was higher for FOLFIRINOX with radiotherapy (88.0% vs. 97.6%, p = 0.045). Other pathological outcomes (ypN0, pathologic complete response, perineural invasion) were comparable.

Conclusions

In this meta-analysis, radiotherapy following neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was associated with an improved R0 resection rate as compared with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX alone, but a difference in survival could not be demonstrated. Randomized trials are needed to determine the added value of radiotherapy following neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in patients with (B)PRC.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10276-8.

Contemporary trials evaluating neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer

While the use of neoadjuvant therapy is well-accepted in the treatment of borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancers, the benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resectable disease has been a topic of debate. Recently, key trials evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer have reported results. This review describes key clinical trials evaluating the use of preoperative therapy in patients with technically resectable pancreatic cancer with a focus on their contribution to the available evidence.

Advances and challenges of neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer has been becoming the second cause of cancer death in the western world, and its disease burden has increased. Neoadjuvant therapy is one of the current research hotspots in the field of pancreatic cancer, aiming to improve the surgical rate and prognosis of pancreatic cancer. Based on the latest evidence, this review discussed neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer from the following three aspects: patient selection, protocols selection of neoadjuvant therapy, and treatment response evaluation and resectability prediction. A big controversy existed on the indications of neoadjuvant treatment, but it was agreed that any patient who is likely to achieve R0 resection due to neoadjuvant therapy should be the targeted population. A variety of chemotherapy regimens were tried for neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer, and FOLFIRINOX and Nab-Paclitaxel plus Gemcitabine are two preferred regimens at present. It was challenging to evaluate treatment response and predict resectability after neoadjuvant therapy, although imaging by CT is widely used. Based on new findings of the remarkable performance of several chemotherapy regimens with or without radiotherapy, the neoadjuvant indications of pancreatic cancer have extended in recent years. However, it is still a challenge to assess the neoadjuvant treatment response and determine the timing of surgery.

Is Complete Pathologic Response in Pancreatic Cancer Overestimated? A Systematic Review of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

In literature, percentages of pathologic complete response (pCR) in patients presenting with resectable (RES), borderline resectable (BLR) or locally advanced (LA) pancreatic cancer (PaC) after neoadjuvant treatment (NADT) are variable, ranging 0-33%. Those data come mostly from retrospective reviews of single centres. The objective of this systematic review is to assess the incidence of pCR.

METHODS

Following the criteria of the PRISMA statement, a literature search was conducted looking for prospective papers focusing on neoadjuvant treatment in PaC. Retrospective papers, other than ductal carcinoma histologies and trials including metastatic patients, were excluded from the present review. Data extraction was carried out by 3 independent investigators. Meta-analysis was performed with ProMeta3 Software (Internovi, 2015). PROSPERO registry: CRD42018095641.

RESULTS

The literature search of Embase, Cochrane and Medline with the terms "neoadjuvant OR preoperative", "pancreatic OR pancreas" and "cancer OR adenocarcinoma OR tumor" led to the identification of 3128 papers. We restricted the search to humans, last 10 years and English language articles resulting in 1158 eligible articles to review. Extended paper revision led to the inclusion of 27 papers. Complete pathologic response ranged 0-11.11%, at the meta-analysis 4% (95% CI 3-5%), in prospective studies 0-9.09% and in prospective databases 1.63-11.11%.

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologic complete response in pancreatic cancer is actually infrequent: high-quality studies provide a more reliable picture of neoadjuvant effects, high rates of pCR are reported in selected retrospective studies but it is overestimated.

A phase II study of liposomal irinotecan with 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: the nITRO trial

Background:

Up-front surgery followed by postoperative chemotherapy remains the standard paradigm for the treatment of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. However, the risk for positive surgical margins, the poor recovery after surgery that often impairs postoperative treatment, and the common metastatic relapse limit the overall clinical outcomes achieved with this strategy. Polychemotherapeutic combinations are valid options for postoperative treatment in patients with good performance status. liposomal irinotecan (Nal-IRI) is a novel nanoliposome formulation of irinotecan that accumulates in tumor-associated macrophages improving the therapeutic index of irinotecan and has been approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer after progression under gemcitabine-based therapy. Thus, it remains of the outmost urgency to investigate introduction of the most novel agents, such as nal-IRI, in perioperative approaches aimed at increasing the long-term effectiveness of surgery.

Methods:

The nITRO trial is a phase II, single-arm, open-label study to assess the safety and the activity of nal-IRI with fluorouracil/leucovorin (5-FU/LV) and oxaliplatin in the perioperative treatment of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The primary tumor must be resectable with no involvement of the major arteries and no involvement or <180° interface between tumor and vessel wall of the major veins. A total of 72 patients will be enrolled to receive a perioperative treatment of three cycles before and three cycles after surgical resection with nal-IRI 50 mg/m², oxaliplatin 60 mg/m², leucovorin 200 mg/m², and 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2, days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary objective is to improve from 40% to 55% the proportion of patients achieving R0 resection after preoperative treatment.

Discussion:

The nITRO trial will contribute to strengthen the clinical evidence supporting perioperative strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer patients. Moreover, this study represents a unique opportunity for translational analyses aimed to identify novel immune-related prognostic and predictive factors in this setting.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrial.gov: NCT03528785. Trial registration data: 1 January 2018

Protocol number: CRC 2017_01

EudraCT Number: 2017-000345-46

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Patients With Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Approximately 20% of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients have (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer [(B)RPC] at diagnosis. Upfront resection with adjuvant chemotherapy has long been the standard of care for these patients. However, although surgical quality has improved, still about 50% of patients never receive adjuvant treatment. Therefore, recent developments have focused on a neoadjuvant approach. Directly comparing results from neoadjuvant and adjuvant regimens is challenging due to differences in patient populations that influence outcomes. Neoadjuvant trials include all patients who have (B)RPC on imaging, while adjuvant-only trials include patients who underwent a complete resection and recovered to a good performance status without any evidence of residual disease. Guidelines recommend neoadjuvant treatment for BRPC patients mainly to improve negative resection margin (R0) rates. For resectable PDAC, upfront resection is still considered the standard of care. However, theoretical advantages of neoadjuvant treatment, including the increased R0 resection rate, early delivery of systemic therapy to all patients, directly addressing occult metastatic disease, and improved patient selection for resection, may also apply to these patients. A systematic review by intention-to-treat showed a superior median overall survival (OS) for any neoadjuvant approach (19 months) compared to upfront surgery (15 months) in (B)RPC patients. A neoadjuvant approach was recently supported by three randomized controlled trials (RCTs). For resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant treatment was superior in a Japanese RCT of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with S-1 vs. upfront surgery, with adjuvant S-1 in both arms (median OS: 37 vs. 27 months, p = 0.015). A Korean trial of neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy vs. upfront resection in BRPC patients was terminated early due to superiority of the neoadjuvant group (median OS: 21 vs. 12 months, p = 0.028; R0 resection: 52 vs. 26%, p = 0.004). The PREOPANC-1 trial for (B)RPC patients also showed favorable outcome for neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy vs. upfront surgery (median OS: 17 vs. 14 months, p = 0.07; R0 resection: 63 vs. 31%, p < 0.001). FOLFIRINOX is likely a better neoadjuvant regimen, because of superiority compared to gemcitabine in both the metastatic and adjuvant setting. Currently, five RCTs evaluating neoadjuvant modified or fulldose FOLFIRINOX are accruing patients.

Pathologic Response to Primary Systemic Therapy With FOLFIRINOX in Patients With Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Primary systemic therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer is currently under investigation. FOLFIRINOX has been shown to be effective in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings and is increasingly being used on and off study in the neoadjuvant setting. The objective pathologic response elicited by this regimen in truly resectable disease has not as yet been widely reported.

METHODS

This analysis focuses on 14 patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who were treated in a pilot study of primary systemic therapy, using 4 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX before surgery. A dedicated pancreatic pathologist reviewed all of the subsequent surgical specimens to assess the degree of tumor regression elicited by this approach, according to the scoring system proposed by Evans.

RESULTS

Four patients (28.6%) had Evans grade I, 4 (28.6%) Evans grade IIa, 2 (14.2%) Evans grade IIb, and 4 (28.6%) Evans grade III response to the primary systemic therapy. There were no Evans grade IV responses.

CONCLUSIONS

The results are intriguing with 28% of the specimens showing destruction of <10% of tumor cells, and only 28% achieving >90% destruction of tumor cells. The significant variation in response once again confirms the known heterogeneity in the biology of this cancer and clearly FOLFIRINOX is not equally effective in all patients. Future studies evaluating primary systemic therapy in pancreatic cancer should examine the optimal duration of therapy before surgery and should include a standardized pathologic grading scheme to better enable comparison of results.

Perioperative Gemcitabine + Erlotinib Plus Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: ACOSOG Z5041 (Alliance) Phase II Trial

BACKGROUND

There is considerable interest in a neoadjuvant approach for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study evaluated perioperative gemcitabine + erlotinib (G+E) for resectable PDAC.

METHODS

A multicenter, cooperative group, single-arm, phase II trial was conducted between April 2009 and November 2013 (ACOSOG Z5041). Patients with biopsy-confirmed PDAC in the pancreatic head without evidence of involvement of major mesenteric vessels (resectable) were eligible. Patients (n = 123) received an 8-week cycle of G+E before and after surgery. The primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included toxicity, response, resection rate, and time to progression. Resectability was assessed retrospectively by central review. The study closed early due to slow accrual, and no formal hypothesis testing was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 114 patients were eligible, consented, and initiated protocol treatment. By central radiologic review, 97 (85%) of the 114 patients met the protocol-defined resectability criteria. Grade 3+ toxicity was reported in 60% and 79% of patients during the neoadjuvant phase and overall, respectively. Twenty-two of 114 (19%) patients did not proceed to surgery; 83 patients (73%) were successfully resected. R0 and R1 margins were obtained in 67 (81%) and 16 (19%) resected patients, respectively, and 54 patients completed postoperative G+E (65%). The 2-year OS rate for the entire cohort (n = 114) was 40% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31-50), with a median OS of 21.3 months (95% CI 17.2-25.9). The 2-year OS rate for resected patients (n = 83) was 52% (95% CI 41-63), with a median OS of 25.4 months (95% CI 21.8-29.6).

CONCLUSIONS

For resectable PDAC, perioperative G+E is feasible. Further evaluation of neoadjuvant strategies in resectable PDAC is warranted with more active systemic regimens.

Implications of Prolonged Time to Pancreaticoduodenectomy After Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation

BACKGROUND

For patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA), the optimal time interval between neoadjuvant chemoradiation (CR) to surgical resection has not been well established.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2014 was queried for patients ≥18 y old diagnosed with PA who received neoadjuvant CR. Survival and short-term outcomes were compared between patients who had pancreaticoduodenectomy ≤12 wk and >12 wk after completion of CR.

RESULTS

1610 patients met selection criteria. Average radiation to surgery (RS) interval was 58.2 ± 39.5 d. 1419 patients had RS interval ≤12 wk (mean 47.4 d) and 191 had RS interval >12 wk (mean 138.8 d). Demographics, CA 19-9 levels, types of chemotherapy and radiation dosage were similar between the two groups. There were more patients with clinical stage III cancers in the >12 wk group than in the ≤12 wk group (33.5% versus 14%). Short-term outcomes were similar between the two groups. However, a long-term survival benefit was observed in the >12 wk group (median 25.8 versus 30.2 mo P = 0.049). An interval >12 wk was associated with significantly prolonged survival on multivariate analysis (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.65-0.99; P = 0.042). Higher clinical stage and positive surgical margins were independently associated with worse survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical resection beyond 12 wk after CR for PA did not worsen short-term outcomes. Waiting may contribute to better patient selection, especially those with locally advanced tumors. In the absence of progressive disease, patients need to be continuously evaluated for surgical resection after CR.

Use of Machine-Learning Algorithms in Intensified Preoperative Therapy of Pancreatic Cancer to Predict Individual Risk of Relapse

Background: Although surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment for pancreatic cancer (PC), long-term outcomes of this treatment remain poor. The aim of this study is to describe the feasibility of a neoadjuvant treatment with induction polychemotherapy (IPCT) followed by chemoradiation (CRT) in resectable PC, and to develop a machine-learning algorithm to predict risk of relapse. Methods: Forty patients with resectable PC treated in our institution with IPCT (based on mFOLFOXIRI, GEMOX or GEMOXEL) followed by CRT (50 Gy and concurrent Capecitabine) were retrospectively analyzed. Additionally, clinical, pathological and analytical data were collected in order to perform a 2-year relapse-risk predictive population model using machine-learning techniques. Results: A R0 resection was achieved in 90% of the patients. After a median follow-up of 33.5 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 18 months and median overall survival (OS) was 39 months. The 3 and 5-year actuarial PFS were 43.8% and 32.3%, respectively. The 3 and 5-year actuarial OS were 51.5% and 34.8%, respectively. Forty-percent of grade 3-4 IPCT toxicity, and 29.7% of grade 3 CRT toxicity were reported. Considering the use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factors, the number of resected lymph nodes, the presence of perineural invasion and the surgical margin status, a logistic regression algorithm predicted the individual 2-year relapse-risk with an accuracy of 0.71 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56–0.84, p = 0.005). The model-predicted outcome matched 64% of the observed outcomes in an external dataset. Conclusion: An intensified multimodal neoadjuvant approach (IPCT + CRT) in resectable PC is feasible, with an encouraging long-term outcome. Machine-learning algorithms might be a useful tool to predict individual risk of relapse. A small sample size and therapy heterogeneity remain as potential limitations.

Impact of Immunotherapy after Resection of Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant immunotherapy has improved outcomes in patients with advanced melanoma; however, the potential benefit for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unknown. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy and immunotherapy (CTx-IT) compared with CTx alone on patient survival after resection of PDAC.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients who underwent resection of PDAC from 2004 to 2015 were identified from the National Cancer Database. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to determine predictors of overall survival (OS) based on the type of adjuvant therapy received. Patients who received adjuvant immunotherapy were compared with those who received adjuvant CTx alone by propensity score matching.

RESULTS

Of 21,313 patients who received curative-intent resection for PDAC followed by adjuvant systemic therapy, 269 (1.3%) patients were treated with adjuvant CTx-IT. Propensity score matching resulted in a cohort of 477 patients: (229 CTx only and 248 CTx-IT). The 5-year OS was higher in the CTx-IT group compared with CTx alone (29.2% vs 18.3%; p = 0.0045). On multivariate analysis, the addition of adjuvant immunotherapy was associated was improved overall survival (hazard ratio 0.74; p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of adjuvant immunotherapy to chemotherapy is associated with improved survival compared with chemotherapy alone after curative-intent resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Future research is warranted to match specific immunotherapy agents with susceptible patient populations to improve outcomes for this aggressive disease.

The Emerging Role of Cyclin-Dependent Kinases (CDKs) in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

The family of cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) has critical functions in cell cycle regulation and controlling of transcriptional elongation. Moreover, dysregulated CDKs have been linked to cancer initiation and progression. Pharmacological CDK inhibition has recently emerged as a novel and promising approach in cancer therapy. This idea is of particular interest to combat pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), a cancer entity with a dismal prognosis which is owed mainly to PDAC's resistance to conventional therapies. Here, we review the current knowledge of CDK biology, its role in cancer and the therapeutic potential to target CDKs as a novel treatment strategy for PDAC.

Currently available first-line drug therapies for treating pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the 9th most common cancer in the United States and the 4th most common cause of cancer-related death given its poor prognosis.

AREAS COVERED

The authors have performed a literature search for pertinent published clinical trials, ongoing Phase 3 clinical trials, and current treatment guidelines using PubMed, Clinicaltrials.gov, and NCCN, ASCO, ESMO, and JPS websites. The review itself discusses landmark studies and ongoing research into the chemotherapy regimens recommended by each oncologic society. The authors also examine drugs that were promising but failed in Phase 3 trials and those currently being investigated. Finally, the authors provide their expert opinion on the subject and provide their future perspectives.

EXPERT OPINION

While advances in chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer have been limited in comparison to other cancers, there have been improvements in survival. Combination therapy and a goal of R0 resection are key elements to extend life. Novel agents directed at the unique properties of pancreatic cancer are promising.

Current Therapeutic Options for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer remains the fourth most common cause of cancer-related mortality and is a major health threat. The majority of cases are diagnosed at advanced disease stages, limiting the chances of long-term survival. Several new therapeutic regimens have been introduced into routine clinical practice in recent years and a plethora of novel approaches is currently undergoing preclinical and early clinical evaluation. This review discusses the current standards of care for systemic therapy of pancreatic cancer and gives a brief outlook on ongoing clinical trials.

Impact of neoadjuvant therapy on postoperative outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection provides the only potentially curative treatment of pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation (NAT) is used to downstage patients with borderline resectable tumors. The objective of this study was to examine the postoperative morbidity and mortality of NAT after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA).

METHODS

Using the American College of Surgeons-National Surgical Quality Improvement Project Targeted Pancreatectomy data, we identified patients who underwent a PD for PDA from 2014 to 2015. Patients were grouped by receipt of NAT 90 days before PD. Bivariable and multivariable analyses was used to compare postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 3748 patients with PDA underwent PD; 926 (24.7%) received NAT. Those in the NAT group had more major vein resections, and longer operating times (all P < 0.001). On pathologic staging, those in the NAT group had smaller tumors (T1, 10.9% vs 5.1%; P < 0.001) and fewer nodes positive (N0, 49% vs 28%; P < 0.001). There were no differences in 30-day postoperative mortality or overall complications. On multivariable analysis, patients who received NAT had a lower likelihood of pancreatic fistula (OR, 0.67; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

NAT does not increase the overall postoperative morbidity or mortality of PD for PDA. There is a decreased likelihood of pancreatic fistulas in patients that receive neoadjuvant therapy.

A phase II trial of gemcitabine, S-1 and LV combination (GSL) neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer

There has been a pressing need to develop optimal regimen for neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for pancreatic cancer (PC). The safety and efficacy of gemcitabine, S-1, and LV combination (GSL) therapy as NAC for borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) PC was evaluated in this phase II study. Patients with pathologically proven BR or LA PC were enrolled and gemcitabine 1000 mg/m² by 30-min infusion on day 1, S-1 40 mg/m² orally twice daily, and LV 25 mg orally twice daily on days 1-7 every 2 weeks were provided, and evaluation by CT every 2 courses was performed. The primary end point was R0 resection rate, and the secondary endpoints were resection rate, response rate, adverse events, surgical outcomes, and survival. Twenty-four patients with PC (21 BR and 3 LA) were enrolled. Response rate and disease control rate of NAC were 17.4 and 87.0%. Grade 3 and 4 toxicities involved neutropenia (34.8%), anorexia (17.4%), and mucositis (17.4%). Serum CA19-9 level decreased by 52.2%. Resection rate was 60.9% after the median of 4 cycles and R0 resection rate was 76.5% in patients undergoing laparotomy. NAC-GSL is a feasible treatment option for BR and LAPC.