Gemcitabine + Nab-paclitaxel or Gemcitabine alone after FOLFIRINOX failure in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a real-world AGEO study

Efficacy of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in second-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer

Despite numerous studies on second-line therapies in metastatic pancreatic cancer, there is no randomized study evaluating the efficacy of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel as a second-line treatment. This study aims to examine the efficacy of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in second-line therapy. In this retrospective study, a total of 218 patients from 23 centers were included. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), treatment efficacy based on ECOG performance status (PS), and tumor marker (CEA, CA 19 - 9) levels. In the second-line treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel, the median PFS was 5.1 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 7.1), and the median OS was 8.6 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 10.0). Median PFS was 6.6 months in patients with normal CEA levels compared to 4.4 months in patients with high CEA levels (P = 0.01). Median PFS was 6 months in patients with ECOG PS 0-1 compared to 3.8 months in patients with PS 2 (P < 0.01). This study demonstrates the contribution of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in both OS and PFS in second-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. It was found to be a good option especially for young patients with good ECOG PS.

Prediction of synergistic gemcitabine-based combination treatment through a novel tumor stemness biomarker NANOG in pancreatic cancer

Gemcitabine remains a first-class chemotherapeutic drug for pancreatic cancer. However, due to the rapid development of gemcitabine resistance in pancreatic cancer, gemcitabine alone or in combination with other anti-cancer drugs only showed limited effect in the clinic. It is extremely challenging to effectively and efficiently determine the optimal drug regimens. Thus, identification of appropriate prediction biomarkers is critical for the rational design of gemcitabine-based therapeutic options. Herein, a pancreatic cancer stem cell (PCSC) model exhibiting chemoresistance to gemcitabine was used to test the activity of clinical cancer drugs in the presence or absence of gemcitabine. As determined by combinatorial treatment, several types of drugs resensitized gemcitabine-resistant PCSCs to gemcitabine, with sorafenib (EGFR inhibitor)/gemcitabine and sunitinib (TBK1 inhibitors)/gemcitabine drug combinations being the most preferred treatments for PCSCs. Following the validation of the PCSC model by an antibody array test of 15-gene expression of stemness biomarkers, NANOG showed markedly different expression in PCSCs compared to the parental cells. From comprehensive analysis of stem cell index versus combination index, a stemness-related correlation model was successfully constructed to demonstrate the correlation between NANOG expression and synergism. Cancer cell stemness was ascertained to be highly relevant to NANOG overexpression that can be abrogated by synergized gemcitabine-drug combinations. Therefore, NANOG works as a therapeutic biomarker for predicating efficient combinatorial treatment of gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer.

Prognostic analysis and outcomes of metastatic pancreatic cancer patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as second or later-line treatment

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) first-line therapy often consists of polychemotherapy regimens, but choosing a second-line therapy after disease progression, especially following first-line FOLFIRINOX, remains a clinical challenge. This study presents results from a large, multicenter, retrospective analysis of Italian patients with metastatic PC (mPC) treated with Nab-paclitaxel/Gemcitabine (AG) as second or later line of treatment. Main objective of the study is to identify prognostic factors that could inform treatment decisions.

METHODS

The study included 160 mPC patients treated with AG in 17 Italian institutions. AG was administered according to labelling dose, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or patient refusal. Variations in schedules, dose modifications, supportive measures, and response evaluation were determined by individual clinicians' practice.

RESULTS

AG was well-tolerated and exhibited promising clinical activity. The overall response rate (ORR) and the disease control rate (DCR) were 22.5% and 45.6%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.9 and 6.8 months, respectively. Among the patients who received AG as a second-line therapy (n = 111, 66.9%), median PFS and OS were 4.2 and 7.4 months, respectively. Notably, in the 76 patients (68%) receiving AG after first-line FOLFIRINOX, an ORR of 19.7% and a DCR of 46.0% were observed, resulting in a median PFS of 3.5 and median OS of 5.7 months. The study identified specific clinical or laboratory parameters (LDH, NLR, fasting serum glucose, liver metastases, ECOG PS, and first-line PFS) as independent prognostic factors at multivariate level. These factors were used to create a prognostic nomogram that divided patients into three risk classes, helping to predict second-line OS and PFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the largest real-world population of mPC patients treated with AG as a second or later line of therapy. It supports the feasibility of this regimen following first-line FOLFIRINOX, particularly in patients with specific clinical and laboratory characteristics who derived prolonged benefit from first-line therapy.

Clinical outcomes of second-line therapy following disease progression on first-line modified FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) is one of the standard first-line therapies in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer (LAPC). However, there is no globally accepted second-line therapy following progression on mFOLFIRINOX.

METHODS

Patients with BRPC and LAPC (n = 647) treated with first-line mFOLFIRINOX between January 2017 and December 2020 were included in this retrospective analysis. The details of the treatment outcomes and patterns of subsequent therapy after mFOLFIRINOX were reviewed.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up duration of 44.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 42.3-47.6), 322 patients exhibited disease progression on mFOLFIRINOX-locoregional progression only in 177 patients (55.0%) and distant metastasis in 145 patients (45.0%). The locoregional progression group demonstrated significantly longer post-progression survival (PPS) than that of the distant metastasis group (10.1 vs. 7.3 months, p = 0.002). In the locoregional progression group, survival outcomes did not differ between second-line chemoradiation/radiotherapy and systemic chemotherapy (progression-free survival with second-line therapy [PFS-2], 3.2 vs. 4.3 months; p = 0.649; PPS, 10.7 vs. 10.2 months; p = 0.791). In patients who received second-line systemic chemotherapy following progression on mFOLFIRINOX (n = 211), gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel was associated with better disease control rates (69.2% vs. 42.3%, p = 0.005) and PFS-2 (3.8 vs. 1.7 months, p = 0.035) than gemcitabine monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study showed the real-world practice pattern of subsequent therapy and clinical outcomes following progression on first-line mFOLFIRINOX in BRPC and LAPC. Further investigation is necessary to establish the optimal therapy after failure of mFOLFIRINOX.

Peak Risk of Recurrence Occurs during the First Two Years after a Pancreatectomy in Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX

No codified/systematic surveillance program exists for borderline/locally advanced pancreatic ductal carcinoma treated with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and a secondary resection. This study aimed to determine the trend of recurrence in patients who were managed using such a treatment strategy. From 2010, 101 patients received FOLFIRINOX and underwent a pancreatectomy, in a minimum follow-up of 5 years. Seventy-one patients (70%, R group) were diagnosed with recurrence after a median follow-up of 11 months postsurgery. In the multivariable analysis, patients in the R-group had a higher rate of weight loss (p = 0.018), higher carbohydrate antigen (CA 19-9) serum levels at diagnosis (p = 0.012), T3/T4 stage (p = 0.017), and positive lymph nodes (p < 0.01) compared to patients who did not experience recurrence. The risk of recurrence in patients with T1/T2 N0 R0 was the lowest (19%), and all recurrences occurred during the first two postoperative years. The peak risk of recurrence for the entire population was observed during the first two postoperative years. The probability of survival decreased until the second year and rebounded to 100% permanently, after the ninth postoperative year. Close monitoring is needed at reduced intervals during the first 2 years following a pancreatectomy and should be extended to later than 5 years for those with unfavorable pathological results.

Comparison of different second line treatments for metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC), first line treatment options usually include combination regimens of folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX or mFOLFIRINOX) or gemcitabine based regimens such as in combination with albumin-bound paclitaxel (GEM + nab-PTX). After progression, multiple regimens including NALIRI + 5-FU and folinic acid, FOLFIRINOX, 5-FU-based oxaliplatin doublets (OFF, FOLFOX, or XELOX), or 5-FU-based monotherapy (FL, capecitabine, or S-1) are considered appropriate by major guidelines. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to compare the efficacy of different treatment strategies tested as second-line regimens for patients with mPDAC after first-line gemcitabine-based systemic treatment.

METHODS

Randomized phase II and III clinical trials (RCTs) were included if they were published or presented in English. Trials of interest compared two active systemic treatments as second-line regimens until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. We performed a Bayesian NMA with published hazard ratios (HRs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of different second-line therapies for mPDAC. The main outcomes of interest were overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS), secondary endpoints were grade 3-4 toxicities. We calculated the relative ranking of agents for each outcome as their surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA). A higher SUCRA score meant a higher ranking for efficacy outcomes.

RESULTS

A NMA of 9 treatments was performed for OS (n = 2521 patients enrolled). Compared with 5-FU + folinic acid both irinotecan or NALIRI + fluoropyrimidines had a trend to better OS (HR = 0.76, 95%CI 0.21-2.75 and HR = 0.74, 95%CI 0.31-1.85). Fluoropyrimidines + folinic acid + oxaliplatin were no better than the combination without oxaliplatin. The analysis of treatment ranking showed that the combination of NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid was most likely to yield the highest OS results (SUCRA = 0.7). Furthermore, the NMA results indicated that with the highest SUCRA score (SUCRA = 0.91), NALIRI + 5-FU + folinic acid may be the optimal choice for improved PFS amongst all regimens studied.

CONCLUSIONS

According to the NMA results, NALIRI + 5-FU, and folinic acid may represent the best second-line treatment for improved survival outcomes in mPDAC. Further evidence from prospective trials is needed to determine the best treatment option for this group of patients.

Retrospective Evaluation of the Efficacy of Gemcitabine-Based Therapies After FOLFIRINOX Failure in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer, Multi-Center Real-Life Data

OBJECTIVE

Combination therapies such as FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine-nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (GnP) are recommended for the first-line treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of gemcitabine-based second-line therapies in patients whose disease progressed on FOLFIRINOX.

METHOD

Patients diagnosed with advanced pancreatic cancer in 7 tertiary hospitals in Turkey were included. Patients were divided into 3 different groups according to their treatment regimens: GnP, gemcitabine doublet (gemcitabine-cisplatin or gemcitabine-capecitabine), and gemcitabine monotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 144 patients were included in the study. In the second-line treatment, 65% of patients were given GnP, 20% were given gemcitabine doublet, and 15% were given gemcitabine monotherapy. The median exposure of the patients to gemcitabine-based therapy was 3 cycles, whereas the median progression-free survival was calculated as 3.4 months. The median overall survival for patients who received GnP was 4.6 months, 6.4 months for patients who received gemcitabine doublet therapy, and 3.7 months for patients who received gemcitabine monotherapy ( P = 0.248).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it has been shown that gemcitabine-based second-line treatments contribute to survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, there was no difference in efficacy between gemcitabine monotherapy or combination treatments.