Second-line oxaliplatin, folinic acid, and fluorouracil versus folinic acid and fluorouracil alone for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer: outcomes from the CONKO-003 trial

Circulating immune-related proteins associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor efficacy in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Most patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) do not benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment. However, the phase II study CheckPAC (NCT02866383) showed a clinical benefit (CB) rate of 37% and a response rate of 14% in patients with metastatic PDAC receiving stereotactic radiation therapy and nivolumab with or without ipilimumab. Translational studies were initiated to characterize the patients who would benefit from this treatment. Here, we evaluated the association between treatment outcome and 92 circulating immuno-oncology-related proteins in patients from the CheckPAC trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study included 78 patients with chemoresistant metastatic PDAC treated with nivolumab ± ipilimumab combined with radiotherapy. Proteins were measured in serum samples collected at baseline and on treatment with the use of the Olink Target 96 Immuno-Oncology panel. A cohort of 234 patients with metastatic PDAC treated with first-line chemotherapy were also included.

RESULTS

High levels of Fas ligand (FASLG) and galectin 1 (Gal-1) and low levels of C-C motif chemokine 4 were associated with CB. High FASLG and Gal-1 were associated with longer progression-free survival in univariable analysis. In the multivariable Cox regression analysis, the association was significant for Gal-1 (P < 0.001) but not significant for FASLG (P = 0.06). A focused unsupervised hierarchal clustering analysis, including T-cell activation and immune checkpoint-related proteins, identified clusters of patients with higher CB rate and higher tumor expression of leukocyte or T-cell markers (CD3, CD45, granzyme B). Thirty-six proteins increased significantly during immunotherapy. Several proteins (including FASLG, checkpoint proteins, and immune activation markers) increased independently of response during immunotherapy but did not increase in the cohort of patients treated with chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Circulating levels of immune-related proteins like FASLG and Gal-1 might be used to predict the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors in patients with metastatic PDAC.

A multicenter retrospective observational NAPOLEON2 study of nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer

Nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid (NFF) is a standard regimen after gemcitabine-based therapy for patients with unresectable or recurrent pancreatic cancer. However, there are limited clinical data on its efficacy and safety in the real-world. We therefore initiated a retrospective and prospective observational study (NAPOLEON-2). The results of the retrospective part were reported herein. In this retrospective study, we evaluated 161 consecutive patients who received NFF as second-or-later-line regimen. The main endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the other endpoints were response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), dose intensity, and adverse events (AEs). The median age was 67 years (range, 38-85 years). The median OS and PFS were 8.1 and 3.4 months, respectively. The objective response and disease control rates were 5% and 52%, respectively. The median relative dose intensity was 81.6% for nanoliposomal irinotecan and 82.9% for fluorouracil. Grade 3 or 4 hematological and nonhematological AEs occurred in 47 and 42 patients, respectively. Common grade 3 or 4 AEs included neutropenia (24%), anorexia (12%), and leukocytopenia (12%). Subanalysis of patients treated with second-line and third-or-later-line demonstrated no statistical significant difference in OS (7.6 months vs. 9.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.35; p = 0.68). In conclusion, NFF has acceptable efficacy and safety profile even in real-world clinical settings. The prospective study is in progress to validate these findings.

The role of germline BRCA1 & BRCA2 mutations in familial pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Familial Pancreatic Cancer (FPC) presents a notable risk, with 3-10% of pancreatic adenocarcinoma cases having a family history. Studies link FPC to syndromes like HBOC, suggesting BRCA1/BRCA2 mutations play a role. BRCA gene functions in DNA repair impact FPC management, influencing sensitivity to therapies like PARP inhibitors. Identifying mutations not only aids FPC treatment but also reveals broader cancer risks. However, challenges persist in selectively applying genetic testing due to cost constraints. This Systematic Review focuses on BRCA1/BRCA2 significance in FPC, diagnostic criteria, prognostic value, and limitations.

METHOD

Original articles published from 2013 to January 2023 were sourced from databases such as Scopus, PubMed, ProQuest, and ScienceDirect. Inclusion criteria comprised observational cohort or diagnostic studies related to the role of BRCA1/2 mutation in correlation to familial pancreatic cancer (FPC), while article reviews, narrative reviews, and non-relevant content were excluded. The assessment of bias used ROBINS-I, and the results were organized using PICOS criteria in a Google spreadsheet table. The systematic review adhered to the PRISMA 2020 checklist.

RESULT

We analyzed 9 diagnostic studies encompassing 1325 families and 4267 patients from Italy, USA, and Poland. Despite the limitation of limited homogenous PICO studies, our findings effectively present evidence. BRCA1/2 demonstrates benefits in detecting first-degree relatives FPC involvement with 2.26-10 times higher risk. These mutation findings also play an important role since with the BRCA1/2 targeted therapy, Poly-ADP Ribose Polymerase inhibitors (PARP) may give better outcomes of FPC treatment. Analysis of BRCA1 and BRCA2 administration's impact on odds ratio (OR) based on six and five studies respectively. BRCA1 exhibited non-significant effects (OR = 1.26, P = 0.51), while BRCA2 showed significance (OR = 1.68, P = 0.04). No heterogeneity observed, indicating consistent results. Further research on BRCA1 is warranted.

CONCLUSION

Detecting the BRCA1/2 mutation gene offers numerous advantages, particularly in its correlation with FPC. For diagnostic and prognostic purposes, testing is strongly recommended for first-degree relatives, who face a significantly higher risk (2.26-10 times) of being affected. Additionally, FPC patients with identified BRCA1/2 mutations exhibit a more favorable prognosis compared to the non-mutated population. This is attributed to the availability of targeted BRCA1/2 therapy, which maximizes treatment outcomes.

Safety and Efficacy of CT041 in Patients With Refractory Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Pooled Analysis of Two Early-Phase Trials

PURPOSE

CT041 is a chimeric antigen receptor (CAR)-modified T-cell therapy that specifically targets claudin18.2 in solid tumors. Here, we report the pooled analysis results of two exploratory clinical trials to evaluate CT041 in patients with previously treated pancreatic cancer (PC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

These two multicenter, open-label phase I/Ib trials (CT041-CG4006, CT041-ST-01) have a similar target population and evaluation schedule. The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of CT041, whereas secondary objectives included efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity.

RESULTS

The combined cohort comprised 24 patients with advanced PC. Among them, five patients (20.8%) had previously received one line of therapy, whereas 19 (79.2%) received ≥2 lines of therapy. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events of grade 3 or more were preconditioning-related hematologic toxicities. Cytokine release syndrome (CRS) and GI disorders were most reported grade 1 or 2 adverse events. The overall response rate and disease control rate were 16.7% and 70.8%. The median progression-free survival (mPFS) after infusion was 3.3 months (95% CI, 1.8 to 6.2), and the median overall survival (mOS) was 10.0 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 17.6). The median duration of response (mDoR)was 9.5 months (95% CI, 2.6 to Not reached), with a DoR rate at 12 months of 50% (95% CI, 5.8 to 84.5). The mPFS (6.0 v 1.0 months, P < .001) and mOS (17.6 v 4.0 months, P < .001) were prolonged in patients achieving partial response/stable disease than the progressive disease group. CA19-9 levels had reduced by at least 30% in 17 (70.8%) patients.

CONCLUSION

In patients with metastatic PC after progression on previous therapy, CT041 demonstrated a tolerable safety profile and encouraging anticancer efficacy signals. Response benefit observed here needs to be ascertained in the future.

Integration of liposomal irinotecan in the first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer: try to do not think about the white bear

The approval of novel therapeutic agents remains widely reliant on evidence derived from large phase III randomized controlled trials. Liposomal irinotecan (ONIVYDE®) stands out as the only drug that has demonstrated improved survival both as a first-line therapy in combination with oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (5FU/LV) (NALIRIFOX) compared to the standard gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in the NAPOLI3 trial, and as a second-line treatment in combination with 5FU/LV compared to the standard 5FU/LV in the NAPOLI1 trial. However, just as the white bear of the Dostoevsky's paradox, the judgment of these results is invariably distracted by the intrusive thought of how different they might be if compared to similar regimens containing standard-free irinotecan as FOLFIRINOX or FOLFIRI, respectively. Here, we present and thoroughly discuss the evidence encompassing the pharmacologic, preclinical, and clinical development of liposomal irinotecan that can dispel any intrusive thoughts and foster a rational and well-considered judgment of this agent and its potential integration into the therapeutic strategies for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Efficacy of nab‑paclitaxel vs. Gemcitabine in combination with S‑1 for advanced pancreatic cancer: A multicenter phase II randomized trial

Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) need a cost-effective treatment regimen. The present study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus S-1 (AS) and gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) regimens in patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced PC. In this open-label, multicenter, randomized study named AvGmPC, eligible patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced PC were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive AS (125 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel, days 1 and 8; 80-120 mg S-1, days 1-14) or GS (1,000 mg/m2 gemcitabine, days 1 and 8; 80-120 mg S-1, days 1-14). The treatment was administered every 3 weeks until intolerable toxicity or disease progression occurred. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Between December 2018 and March 2022, 101 of 106 randomized patients were treated and evaluated for analysis (AS, n=49; GS, n=52). As of the data cutoff, the median follow-up time was 11.37 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 9.31-13.24]. The median PFS was 7.16 months (95% CI, 5.19-12.32) for patients treated with AS and 6.41 months (95% CI, 3.72-8.84) for patients treated with GS (HR=0.78; 95% CI, 0.51-1.21; P=0.264). The AS regimen showed a slightly improved overall survival (OS; 13.27 vs. 10.64 months) and a significantly improved ORR (44.90 vs. 15.38%; P=0.001) compared with the GS regimen. In the subgroup analyses, PFS and OS benefits were observed in patients treated with the AS regimen who had KRAS gene mutations and high C-reactive protein (CRP) levels (≥5 mg/l). The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia, anemia and alopecia in the two groups. Thrombocytopenia occurred more frequently in the GS group than in the AS group. While the study did not meet the primary endpoint, the response benefit observed for AS may be suggestive of meaningful clinical activity in this population. In particular, promising survival benefits were observed in the subsets of patients with KRAS gene mutations and high CRP levels, which is encouraging and warrants further investigation. This trial was retrospectively registered as ChiCTR1900024588 on July 18, 2019.

Gemcitabine and Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine Alone After 5-Fluorouracil, Oxaliplatin, and Irinotecan in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase III PRODIGE 65-UCGI 36-GEMPAX UNICANCER Study

PURPOSE

GEMPAX was an open-label, randomized phase III clinical trial designed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of gemcitabine plus paclitaxel versus gemcitabine alone as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) who previously received 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan.

METHODS

Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed mPDAC were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive GEMPAX (paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 + gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2; IV; once at day (D) 1, D8, and D15/arm A) or gemcitabine (arm B) alone once at D1, D8, and D15 every 28 days until progression, toxicity, or patient's decision. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), quality of life, and safety.

RESULTS

Overall, 211 patients (median age, 64 [30-86] years; 62% male) were included. After a median study follow-up for alive patients of 13.4 versus 13.8 months in arm A versus arm B, the median OS (95% CI) was 6.4 (5.2 to 7.4) versus 5.9 months (4.6 to 6.9; hazard ratio [HR], 0.87 [0.63 to 1.20]; P = 0.4095), the median PFS was 3.1 (2.2 to 4.3) versus 2.0 months (1.9 to 2.3; HR, 0.64 [0.47 to 0.89]; P = 0.0067), and the ORR was 17.1% (11.3 to 24.4) versus 4.2% (0.9 to 11.9; P = 0.008) in arm A versus arm B, respectively. Overall, 16.7% of patients in arm A and 2.9% in arm B discontinued their treatment because of adverse events (AEs). One grade 5 AE associated with both gemcitabine and paclitaxel was reported in arm A (acute respiratory distress), and 58.0% versus 27.1% of patients experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related AEs in arm A versus arm B, among which 15.2% versus 4.3% had anemia, 15.9% versus 15.7% had neutropenia, 19.6% versus 4.3% had thrombocytopenia, 10.1% versus 2.9% had asthenia and 12.3% versus 0.0% had neuropathy.

CONCLUSION

While GEMPAX did not meet the primary end point of OS versus gemcitabine alone in patients with mPDAC in the second-line setting, both PFS and ORR were significantly improved.

The Natural Product Parthenolide Inhibits Both Angiogenesis and Invasiveness and Improves Gemcitabine Resistance by Suppressing Nuclear Factor κB Activation in Pancreatic Cancer Cell Lines

We previously established pancreatic cancer (PaCa) cell lines resistant to gemcitabine and found that the activity of nuclear factor κB (NF-κB) was enhanced upon the acquisition of gemcitabine resistance. Parthenolide, the main active ingredient in feverfew, has been reported to exhibit antitumor activity by suppressing the NF-κB signaling pathway in several types of cancers. However, the antitumor effect of parthenolide on gemcitabine-resistant PaCa has not been elucidated. Here, we confirmed that parthenolide significantly inhibits the proliferation of both gemcitabine-resistant and normal PaCa cells at concentrations of 10 µM and higher, and that the NF-κB activity is significantly inhibited, even by 1 µM parthenolide. In Matrigel invasion assays and angiogenesis assays, the invasive and angiogenic potentials were higher in gemcitabine-resistant than normal PaCa cells and were inhibited by a low concentration of parthenolide. Furthermore, Western blotting showed suppressed MRP1 expression in gemcitabine-resistant PaCa treated with a low parthenolide concentration. In a colony formation assay, the addition of 1 µM parthenolide improved the sensitivity of gemcitabine-resistant PaCa cell lines to gemcitabine. These results suggest that parthenolide may be used as a novel therapeutic agent for the treatment of gemcitabine-resistant PaCa.

Systemic treatments in pancreatic cancer: Taiwan pancreas society recommendation

Pancreatic cancer is a highly aggressive malignancy with a poor prognosis. Over the past decade, significant therapeutic advancements have improved the survival rates of patients with pancreatic cancer. One of the primary factors contributing to these positive outcomes is the evolution of chemotherapy, from monotherapy to doublet or triplet regimens, and the integration of multimodal approaches. Additionally, targeted agents tailored to patients with specific genetic alterations and the development of cell therapies show promise in benefiting certain subpopulations. This article focuses on examining pivotal studies that explore the role of chemotherapy in neoadjuvant, adjuvant, maintenance, and salvage settings; highlights interesting findings related to cell therapy; and provides an overview of ongoing trials concerning metastatic settings. This review primarily aimed to offer recommendations based on therapeutic evidence, recent advancements in new treatment combinations, and the most innovative approaches. A unique aspect of this review is the inclusion of published papers on clinical trials and real-world data in Taiwan, thus adding a valuable perspective to the overall analysis.

Advances in the management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer remains among the malignancies with the worst outcomes. Survival has been improving, but at a slower rate than other cancers. Multimodal treatment, including chemotherapy, surgical resection, and radiotherapy, has been under investigation for many years. Because of the anatomical characteristics of the pancreas, more emphasis on treatment selection has been placed on local extension into major vessels. Recently, the development of more effective treatment regimens has opened up new treatment strategies, but urgent research questions have also become apparent. This review outlines the current management of pancreatic cancer, and the recent advances in its treatment. The review discusses future treatment pathways aimed at integrating novel findings of translational and clinical research.

Clinical outcomes and response to chemotherapy in a cohort of pancreatic cancer patients with germline variants of unknown significance (VUS) in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes

PURPOSE

The clinical outcome and the efficacy of chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients with BRCA1/2 Variants of Unknown Significance (VUS) is unknown. We explored the effects of chemotherapy with or without Platinum in non metastatic and metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with BRCA1/2 VUS.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of non-metastatic or metastatic pancreatic cancer patients with gBRCA1/2 VUS treated in 13 Italian centers between November 2015 and December 2020 was performed. All patients were assessed for toxicity and RECIST 1.1 response. Metastatic patients were evaluated for survival outcome.

RESULTS

30 pancreatic cancer patients with gBRCA1/2 VUS were considered: 20 were M+ and 10 were non-M+. Pl-CT was recommended to 16 patients: 10 M+ (6 FOLFIRINOX and 4 PAXG) and 6 non-M+ (3 FOLFIRINOX and 3 PAXG); 11 patients received Nabpaclitaxel-Gemcitabine (AG; 8 M+) and 3 patients (2 M+) were treated with Gemcitabine (G). The RECIST 1.1 response rate was 27% for AG and 44% for Pl-CT (22% for (m) FOLFIRINOX and 71% PAXG). 1 year Progression-Free Survival was 37.5% for patients treated with AG and 33% in the Pl-CT subgroup. Median Overall Survival (OS) was 23.5 months for patients treated with AG and 14 months for the Pl-CT subgroup. 1 Year and 2 Year OS were numerically better for AG (1 Year OS: 75% vs 60% and 2 Year OS: 50% and 20% in AG and Pl-CT subgroups, respectively) as well.

CONCLUSIONS

Pl-CT does not seem to be associated with a better outcome compared to AG chemotherapy in PDAC patients with BRCA 1/2 VUS.

Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

First-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) includes gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) and FOLFIRINOX (FFX). However, the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy and the role of combination chemotherapy in clinical practice is still unknown. Data was gathered from 14 hospitals in the Kyushu area of Japan from December 2013 to March 2017. The median overall survival (mOS) from second-line treatment was contrasted between patients who received second-line chemotherapy (CT group) and those who received the best supportive care (BSC group). Furthermore, the mOS of combination chemotherapy was compared to mono chemotherapy in the CT group. To control possible bias in the selection of treatment, we performed a propensity score-adjusted analysis. A total of 255 patients received GnP or FFX as first-line chemotherapy. There were 156 in the CT group and 77 in the BSC group of these. The CT group had a significantly longer mOS than the BSC group (5.2 vs. 2.6 months; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.38; 95% CI 0.27-0.54). In the CT group, 89 patients received combination chemotherapy while 67 received mono chemotherapy. The mOS did not differ significantly between the combination and mono chemotherapy groups (5.5 vs. 4.8 months; adjusted HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.58-1.33). Among patients with MPC receiving second-line treatment, the CT group had a significantly longer mOS than the BSC group, but combination chemotherapy conferred no improvement in survival compared to mono chemotherapy.

A Simple Overview of Pancreatic Cancer Treatment for Clinical Oncologists

Pancreatic cancer (PDAC) is one of the most aggressive solid tumors and is showing increasing incidence. The aim of our review is to provide practical help for all clinical oncologists and to summarize the current management of PDAC using a simple "ABC method" (A-anatomical resectability, B-biological resectability and C-clinical conditions). For anatomically resectable PDAC without any high-risk factors (biological or conditional), the actual standard of care is represented by surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The remaining PDAC patients should all be treated with initial systemic therapy, though the intent for each is different: for borderline resectable patients, the intent is neoadjuvant; for locally advanced patients, the intent is conversion; and for metastatic PDAC patients, the intent remains just palliative. The actual standard of care in first-line therapy is represented by two regimens: FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Recently, NALIRIFOX showed positive results over gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. There are limited data for maintenance therapy after first-line treatment, though 5-FU or FOLFIRI after initial FOLFIRINOX, and gemcitabine, after initial gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, might be considered. We also dedicate space to special rare conditions, such as PDAC with germline BRCA mutations, pancreatic acinar cell carcinoma and adenosquamous carcinoma of the pancreas, with few clinically relevant remarks.

Treatment sequences and prognostic/predictive factors in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: univariate and multivariate analyses of a real-world study in Europe

BACKGROUND

Real-world data on treatment patterns/outcomes for metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPAC) are limited. This study aims to assess real-world treatment patterns, survival outcomes, and prognostic/predictive factors in patients with mPAC.

METHODS

Retrospective, observational, chart-review involving medical oncologists and gastroenterologists from five European countries. Physicians reported information on disease and patient characteristics, diagnosis, and treatment for patients diagnosed with mPAC from January-October 2016. Outcomes included median progression-free survival (mPFS), median overall survival (mOS), and the impact of baseline performance status on survival. Univariate/multivariate regression analyses were undertaken to identify prognostic/predictive factors.

RESULTS

Three hundred four physicians and 3432 patients were included. First-line therapies included modified (m)FOLFIRINOX (28.4%), gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (28.0%), and gemcitabine monotherapy (23.0%). Frequent second-line therapies were gemcitabine monotherapy (25.0%), fluorouracil (5-FU) + oxaliplatin (21.8%), and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel (16.7%). Most frequent first- to second-line treatment sequences were gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel followed by fluoropyrimidine combinations. Longest unadjusted estimated mOS was observed with (m)FOLFIRINOX followed by gemcitabine-based combinations (19.1 months). Multivariate analysis identified significant prognostic/predictive factors for OS and PFS including performance status and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9) levels.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment and treatment sequences were generally in accordance with guidelines at the time of the study. Identification of prognostic/predictive factors for survival may help inform the individualised management of mPAC patients in the future.

A real-world analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of liposomal irinotecan plus 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in Belgium

Background

Currently, nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) + 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5-FU/LV) is the only approved second-line treatment for patients suffering from metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC). However, also other chemotherapeutic regimens are used in this setting and due to the lack of clear real-world data on the efficacy of the different regimens, there is no consensus on the optimal treatment sequence for mPDAC patients.

Objectives

To provide information on the safe and efficacious use of nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV in clinical practice in Belgium, which is needed for healthcare professionals to estimate the risk-benefit ratio of the intervention.

Methods

Medical data of adult patients with mPDAC who were treated with nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV in one of the participating Belgian hospitals were retrospectively collected. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed to obtain survival curves to estimate the median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). All other results were presented descriptively.

Results

A total of 56 patients [median age at diagnosis: 69 years (range 43 years), 57.1% male] were included. Patients received a median of 5 (range 49 cycles) nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV cycles, extended over 10 weeks (range 130.8 weeks). The median start dose for nal-IRI was 70 mg/m² (range 49.24 mg/m²) and chemotherapy dose reduction and delay occurred in, respectively, 42.8% and 37.5% of the patients. The median OS was 6.8 months (95% CI: 5.6-8.4 months) with a 6-month survival rate of 57.4% and a 1-year survival rate of 27.8% in the overall study population. The median OS for patients treated with nal-IRI as second-line therapy or as later-line treatment was, respectively, 6.8 months (95% CI: 5.9-7.0 months) and 5.6 months (95% CI: 4.2-no upper limit). In the overall study population, a median PFS of 3.1 months (95% CI: 2.4-4.6 months) and a disease control rate of 48.3%, comprising 30.4% stable disease, 16.1% partial and 1.8% complete response, was observed. The median PFS for patients treated with nal-IRI as second-line therapy was 3.9 months (95% CI: 2.8-4.8 months) while this was 2.4 months (95% CI: 1.9-9.1 months) for those that received nal-IRI in a later-line treatment. In terms of safety, gastrointestinal problems occurred most (64.3% of the patients) and from all reported treatment emergent adverse events, 39.2% were grade 3 or 4.

Conclusion

Nal-IRI + 5-FU/LV is a valuable, effective, and safe sequential treatment option following gemcitabine-based therapy in patients with mPDAC.

Trial details

Retrospective study on the efficacy and tolerability of liposomal irinotecan (NALIRI); ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0509506 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05095064?term=naliri&draw=2&rank=2).

Real-Life Results of Palliative Chemotherapy in Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

To assess the efficacy of FOLFIRINOX(FFX), gemcitabine-based regimens (GB), and gemcitabine monotherapy (Gem) in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC).

METHODS

This is a retrospective study that included 83 patients with mPDAC treated with first-line chemotherapy (L1) with either FFX, GB or Gem between 2015 and 2017. Progression-free survival (PFS) for L1 and second-line chemotherapy (L2) (PFS-L1 and PFS-L2) and overall survival (OS) were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Median PFS-L1 for FFX, GB and Gem groups was 9 months (95% (Confidence Interval) CI 2.76-15.24), 5 months (95%CI 3.44-6.56), and 5 months (95%CI 3.76-6.24), respectively (p = 0.04). OS was 14 months (95%CI 11.16-16.85), 12 months (95%CI: 9.44-11.56), and 7 months (95%CI: 5.7-8.3) for patients treated with FFX, GB, and Gem, respectively (p = 0.0001). ECOG-PS (0/1) (Hazard Ratio (HR) 6.74, p = 0.002), age > 70 years (HR 0.25, p = 0.04), body tumors (HR 2.8, p = 0.048), CA19-9 > 39 U/mL (HR 0.26, p = 0.02), and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) > 4.15 (HR 6.76, p = 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for PFS-L1. Male gender (HR 3.02, p = 0.026), ECOG-PS (0/1) (HR 4.21, p = 0.003), L1 with FFX (HR 0.255, p = 0.007), and NLR > 4.15 (HR 2.65, p = 0.04) were independent prognostic factors of OS. PFS-L2 (HR 6.91, p = 0.013) and OS-L2 (HR 6.95, p = 0.037) were significantly higher in patients first treated with FFX.

CONCLUSIONS

The OS of patients who receive FFX or GB is comparable. The best PFS-L1 belongs to the FFX group. Male gender, ECOG-PS 0/1, the FFX regimen, and NLR > 4.15 were independent predictors of OS. PFS-L2 and OS-L2 were favorably impacted by L1 with FFX.

Efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors in microsatellite unstable/mismatch repair-deficient advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an AGEO European Cohort

BACKGROUND

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) improve oncological outcomes in patients with microsatellite instability-high (MSI) or mismatch repair-deficient (dMMR) advanced solid tumours. Nevertheless, based on limited published data, the outcome of patients with MSI/dMMR pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) seems poorer when compared to other malignancies. This multi-institutional analysis sought to assess the efficacy and tolerability of ICIs in a large real-world cohort of patients with MSI/dMMR PDAC.

METHODS

We retrospectively collected data from patients with MSI/dMMR advanced PDAC treated with ICIs in 16 centers. Progression-free survival and overall survival were calculated from the start of treatment, and we report objective response and disease control rates according to RECIST V1.1.

RESULTS

Thirty-one MSI/dMMR advanced PDAC patients were identified. Twenty-five patients received single-agent anti-PD-1 antibodies, three patients received the combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab and three patients received immunotherapy in combination with chemotherapy. Among 31 evaluable patients, 15 (48.4%) had an objective response (three complete responses and 12 partial responses), and six (19.4%) had stable disease. With a median follow-up of 18 months, the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 26.7 months and the median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Disease control rates (DCRs) among patients with only one line of prior therapy (N = 17) was 76.5%. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were not observed.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective analysis suggests that ICIs are effective and well tolerated in patients with MSI/dMMR advanced PDAC. Hence, our work supports the use of PD-1 inhibition in this group of patients with high unmet medical need.

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.

[Exocrine pancreatic cancer - what is new in the update of the S3 guideline?]

In 2020, worldwide 495,773 people were diagnosed with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and 466,003 patients died from pancreatic cancer. Pancreatic cancer ranks 13th among cancer diagnosis and is the 7th most common cause of cancer-related deaths 1.In Germany, each year approximately 10,000 people develop pancreatic cancer and around the same number of patients die from this disease 2. The relative 5-year survival rate is only 10%. The majority of patients die within the year of diagnosis.Incidence and mortality of pancreatic cancer have continuously increased over the recent years. There are multiple reasons for this finding: pancreatic cancer occurs more frequently in older patients which leads to a higher incidence in an aging society. There are no effective screening and early detection measures for sporadic pancreatic cancer. Therefore, the majority of patients are diagnosed at an advanced stage where the tumor is no longer amenable to curative treatment. Furthermore, the majority of pancreatic cancers is per se likely to constitute a disseminated disease, even if initial imaging suggests a localized, surgically amenable disease. This is reflected by the high rate of early metastases and the small number of patients with long-term survival after surgery with curative intent.The S3 guideline exocrine pancreatic cancer aims to present the available evidence on epidemiology, molecular alterations, diagnostics, surgical and non-surgical treatment as well as palliative measures in order to support all those involved in the treatment of this tumor and to improve the care of patients.To better address this need, the S3 guideline was updated again in 2022 and also changed to a living guideline with regular updates to further improve the timeliness of the guideline.

C-reactive protein/albumin ratio is the most significant inflammatory marker in unresectable pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel

There are limited absolute biomarkers for determining the prognosis before first- and second-line palliative chemotherapy in unresectable pancreatic cancer (urPC) patients. To find the best prognostic inflammatory marker, we investigated relationships between overall survival (OS) and six inflammatory markers; C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CAR), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), prognostic nutrition index (PNI), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), and prognostic index (PI). We examined 255 patients who received gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy and 159 patients who subsequently underwent second-line chemotherapy. First-line patients with lower CAR had better OS compared to those with a higher CAR (hazard ratio 0.57; 95% confidential index 0.42-77; P < 0.01). Similarly, lower NLR (P = 0.01), higher PNI (P = 0.04), lower PLR (P = 0.03), GPS score of 0 (P < 0.01) and PI score of 0 (P < 0.01) were all associated with better OS. CAR demonstrated the best superiority for determining survival prognosis through the use of area under the curve of time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic curves. Furthermore, a lower CAR before second-line therapy exhibited better OS versus higher CAR (P < 0.01). Therefore, CAR might be a useful biomarker for predicting urPC patient prognosis in both first- and second-line chemotherapy.

Scoring model with serum albumin and CA19-9 for metastatic pancreatic cancer in second-line treatment: results from the NAPOLEON study

BACKGROUND

Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer refractory to first-line chemotherapy (CTx) have few treatment options. It is unclear what kind of patients could be brought about survival benefit by 2nd-line CTx after refractory to gemcitabine + nab-PTX (GnP) or FOLFIRINOX.

METHODS

This analysis was conducted as part of a multicenter retrospective study of GnP or FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Excluding censored cases, 156 and 77 patients, respectively, received second-line chemotherapy (CTx) and best supportive care (BSC). Using prognostic factors for post-discontinuation survivals (PDSs) at the first-line determination in multivariate analysis, we developed a scoring system to demonstrate the benefit of second-line CTx.

RESULTS

The second-line CTx group had a median PDS of 5.2 months, whereas the BSC group had a median PDS of 2.7 months (hazard ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.57; p < 0.01). According to the Cox regression model, serum albumin levels below 3.5 g/dL, and CA19-9 levels above 1000 U/mL were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.01). Serum albumin (≥ and < 3.5 g/dL allotted to scores 0 and 1) and CA19-9 (< and ≥ 1000 U/mL allotted to scores 0 and 1) at first-line determination were used to develop the scoring system. The PDSs of patients with scores of 0 and 1 were significantly better than those of the BSC group; however, there was no significant difference between the PDSs of patients with score 2 and the BSC group.

CONCLUSION

The survival advantage of second-line CTx, was observed in patients with scores of 0 and 1 but not in those with score 2.

Roles of lncRNAs in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Diagnosis, treatment, and the development of drug resistance

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal cancers, primarily due to its late diagnosis, high propensity to metastasis, and the development of resistance to chemo-/radiotherapy. Accumulating evidence suggests that long non-coding RNAs (lncRNAs) are intimately involved in the treatment resistance of pancreatic cancer cells via interacting with critical signaling pathways and may serve as potential diagnostic/prognostic markers or therapeutic targets in PDAC.

DATA SOURCES

We carried out a systematic review on lncRNAs-based research in the context of pancreatic cancer and presented an overview of the updated information regarding the molecular mechanisms underlying lncRNAs-modulated pancreatic cancer progression and drug resistance, together with their potential value in diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of PDAC. Literature mining was performed in PubMed with the following keywords: long non-coding RNA, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, pancreatic cancer up to January 2022. Publications relevant to the roles of lncRNAs in diagnosis, prognosis, drug resistance, and therapy of PDAC were collected and systematically reviewed.

RESULTS

LncRNAs, such as HOTAIR, HOTTIP, and PVT1, play essential roles in regulating pancreatic cancer cell proliferation, invasion, migration, and drug resistance, thus may serve as potential diagnostic/prognostic markers or therapeutic targets in PDAC. They participate in tumorigenesis mainly by targeting miRNAs, interacting with signaling molecules, and involving in the epithelial-mesenchymal transition process.

CONCLUSIONS

The functional lncRNAs play essential roles in pancreatic cancer cell proliferation, invasion, migration, and drug resistance and have potential values in diagnosis, prognostic prediction, and treatment of PDAC.

Multidisciplinary team diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer: Current landscape and future prospects

The pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer has not been completely clear, there is no highly sensitive and specific detection method, so early diagnosis is very difficult. Despite the rapid development of tumor diagnosis and treatment, it is difficult to break through in the short term and the overall 5-year survival rate of pancreatic cancer is less than 8%. In the face of the increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, in addition to strengthening basic research, exploring its etiology and pathogenesis, it is urgent to optimize the existing diagnosis and treatment methods through standard multidisciplinary team (MDT), and formulate personalized treatment plan to achieve the purpose of improving the curative effect. However, there are some problems in MDT, such as insufficient understanding and enthusiasm of some doctors, failure to operate MDT according to the system, lack of good communication between domestic and foreign peers, and lack of attention in personnel training and talent echelon construction. It is expected to protect the rights and interests of doctors in the future and ensure the continuous operation of MDT. To strengthen the research on the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer, MDT can try the Internet +MDT mode to improve the efficiency of MDT.

Fluoropyrimidine combination therapy versus fluoropyrimidine monotherapy for gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Fluoropyrimidine-based regimens have been investigated as the second line chemotherapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer refractory to gemcitabine. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of fluoropyrimidine combination therapy versus fluoropyrimidine monotherapy in such patients.

METHODS

The databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ASCO Abstracts and ESMO Abstracts were systematically searched. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared fluoropyrimidine combination therapy versus fluoropyrimidine monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer were included. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Secondary outcomes included progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR) and serious toxicities. Statistical analyses were performed by using Review Manager 5.3. Egger's test was performed to assess the statistical evidence of publication bias by using stata 12.0.

RESULTS

A total of 1183 patients from six randomized controlled trials were included for this analysis. Fluoropyrimidine combination therapy increased ORR [RR 2.82 (1.83-4.33), p<0.00001] and PFS [HR 0.71 (0.62-0.82), p<0.00001], without significant heterogeneity. Fluoropyrimidine combination therapy improved OS [HR 0.82 (0.71-0.94), p = 0.006], with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 76%, p = 0.0009). The significant heterogeneity might have been caused by the different administration regimens and baseline characteristics. Peripheral neuropathy and diarrhea were more common in the regimens containing oxaliplatin and irinotecan, respectively. No publication bias was detected by Egger's tests.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with fluoropyrimidine monotherapy, fluoropyrimidine combination therapy had a higher response rate and longer PFS in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer. Fluoropyrimidine combination therapy could be recommended in the second line setting. However, due to concerns about toxicities, the dose intensities of chemotherapy drugs should be carefully considered in patients with weakness.

Second-line therapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients with germline BRCA1-2 pathogenic variants (gBRCA1-2pv)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) harbouring germline BRCA1-2 pathogenic variants (gBRCA1-2pv) is a distinct nosological entity. Information on second-line therapy (2LT) outcome in this setting is lacking.

METHODS

Data of gBRCA1-2pv metastatic PDAC patients treated with chemotherapy were collected. A primary analysis of 2LT RECIST response, median progression-free survival (mPFS₂) and overall survival (mOS₂), was performed. A secondary analysis addressed the impact of timing of platinum introduction on the outcome of patients receiving at least a first-line combination chemotherapy (1LT).

RESULTS

Eighty-four gBRCA1-2pv metastatic PDAC patients were enrolled. The primary analysis, including 43 patients, highlighted a significant improvement of mPFS₂ and a doubled response rate, in the platinum-based 2LT subgroup as compared to the platinum-free (8.8 versus 3.7 months, p = 0.013). Seventy-seven patients were included in the secondary analysis. Median PFS₁ of 3- and 4-drug platinum-based 1LT significantly outperformed both platinum-free combinations and platinum-based doublets (11.4 versus 6.4 versus 7.9 months, p = 0.01). Albeit still immature, data on mOS paralleled those on mPFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlighted the beneficial role of platinum agents in gBRCA1-2pv PDAC patients also in second-line treatment setting. However, our data suggest that early use of 3- and 4-drug platinum-based chemotherapy combinations provides a survival outcome advantage.

FOLFOX regimen after failure of fluorouracil and leucovorin plus nanoliposomal-irinotecan therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Fluorouracil, leucovorin (5FU/LV), and nanoliposomal-irinotecan (nal-IRI) combination therapy has been established as the second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Oxaliplatin with 5FU/LV (FOLFOX) is often used as a subsequent treatment, although its efficacy and safety are yet to be fully elucidated. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX as a third- or later-line treatment for patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, retrospective study that enrolled 43 patients who received FOLFOX after failure of gemcitabine-based regimen followed by 5FU/LV + nal-IRI therapy between October 2020 and January 2022. FOLFOX therapy consisted of oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²), levo-leucovorin calcium (200 mg/m²) and 5-FU (2400 mg/m²) every 2 weeks per cycle. Overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response, and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

At the median follow-up time of 3.9 months in all patients, the median overall survival and progression-free survival were 3.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-4.8) and 1.3 months (95% CI, 1.0-1.5), respectively. Response and disease control rates were 0 and 25.6%, respectively. The most common adverse event was anaemia in all grades followed by anorexia; the incidence of anorexia and grades 3 and 4 was 21 and 4.7%, respectively. Notably, grades 3-4 peripheral sensory neuropathy was not observed. Multivariable analysis revealed that a C-reactive protein (CRP) level of > 1.0 mg/dL was a poor prognostic factor for both progression-free survival and overall survival: hazard ratios were 2.037 (95% CI, 1.010-4.107; p = 0.047) and 2.471 (95% CI, 1.063-5.745; p = 0.036), respectively.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOX as a subsequent treatment after failure of second-line treatment with 5FU/LV + nal-IRI is tolerable, although its efficacy is limited, particularly in patients with high CRP levels.

Utility of Comprehensive Genomic Profiling Tests for Patients with Incurable Pancreatic Cancer in Clinical Practice

Although comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) tests have been covered under the Japanese national health insurance program since 2018, the utility and issues of CGP tests have not been clarified. We retrospectively reviewed 115 patients with incurable pancreatic cancer (IPC) who underwent CGP tests in a Japanese cancer referral center from November 2019 to August 2021. We evaluated the results of CGP tests, treatments based on CGP tests, and survival time. Eight cases (6.9%) were diagnosed as tumor mutation burden-high (TMB-H) and/or microsatellite instability-high (MSI-H). The gene mutation rates of KRAS/TP53/CDKN2A/SMAD4 were 93.0/83.0/53.0/25.2%, respectively. Twenty-five patients (21.7%) had homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-related genetic mutations. Four patients (3.5%) having TMB-H and/or MSI-H were treated with pembrolizumab, and only two patients (1.7%) participated in the clinical trials. Patient characteristics were not significantly different between patients with and without HRD-related gene mutations. The median OS was significantly longer in the HRD (+) group than in the HRD (-) group (749 days vs. 519 days, p = 0.047). In multivariate analysis, HRD-related gene mutation was an independent prognostic factor associated with favorable OS. CGP tests for patients with IPC have the potential utility of detecting HRD-related gene mutations as prognostic factors as well as a therapeutic search.

Second-line treatment options for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A systematic literature review

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this review was to characterize the second- and later-line (≥2L) treatment landscape for patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC).

METHODS

This systematic literature review (PROSPERO: CRD42021279753) involved searches of MEDLINE® and Embase to identify results from prospective studies of ≥2L treatment options for metastatic pancreatic cancer published from 2016 to 2021. Publications were screened according to predetermined eligibility criteria; population-level data were extracted using standardized data fields. Publication quality was assessed according to Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The data were analyzed descriptively, grouped by drug class.

RESULTS

Sixty publications were identified, including 23 relating to comparative trials. GRADE assessment found that, of these 23 trials, 83% reported high or moderate-quality evidence. Of the publications relating to comparative trials, nine (three trials) reported favorable results: the pivotal phase 3 NAPOLI-1 trial for liposomal irinotecan; a phase 3 trial of non-liposomal irinotecan within the FOLFIRINOX regimen; and a phase 2 trial of eryaspase plus chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The level of unmet need for ≥2L treatment options for mPDAC remains high. Irinotecan-based regimens currently offer the greatest promise. Investigations into paradigm-changing agents and combination approaches continue.

Barriers and opportunities for gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer therapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) has become one of the leading causes of cancer-related deaths across the world. A lack of durable responses to standard-of-care chemotherapies renders its treatment particularly challenging and largely contributes to the devastating outcome. Gemcitabine, a pyrimidine antimetabolite, is a cornerstone in PDA treatment. Given the importance of gemcitabine in PDA therapy, extensive efforts are focusing on exploring mechanisms by which cancer cells evade gemcitabine cytotoxicity, but strategies to overcome them have not been translated into patient care. Here, we will introduce the standard treatment paradigm for patients with PDA, highlight mechanisms of gemcitabine action, elucidate gemcitabine resistance mechanisms, and discuss promising strategies to circumvent them.

Sotorasib in KRAS p.G12C-Mutated Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

KRAS p.G12C mutation occurs in approximately 1 to 2% of pancreatic cancers. The safety and efficacy of sotorasib, a KRAS G12C inhibitor, in previously treated patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated pancreatic cancer are unknown.

METHODS

We conducted a single-group, phase 1-2 trial to assess the safety and efficacy of sotorasib treatment in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated pancreatic cancer who had received at least one previous systemic therapy. The primary objective of phase 1 was to assess safety and to identify the recommended dose for phase 2. In phase 2, patients received sotorasib at a dose of 960 mg orally once daily. The primary end point for phase 2 was a centrally confirmed objective response (defined as a complete or partial response). Efficacy end points were assessed in the pooled population from both phases and included objective response, duration of response, time to objective response, disease control (defined as an objective response or stable disease), progression-free survival, and overall survival. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

The pooled population from phases 1 and 2 consisted of 38 patients, all of whom had metastatic disease at enrollment and had previously received chemotherapy. At baseline, patients had received a median of 2 lines (range, 1 to 8) of therapy previously. All 38 patients received sotorasib in the trial. A total of 8 patients had a centrally confirmed objective response (21%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 10 to 37). The median progression-free survival was 4.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 5.6), and the median overall survival was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.0 to 9.1). Treatment-related adverse events of any grade were reported in 16 patients (42%); 6 patients (16%) had grade 3 adverse events. No treatment-related adverse events were fatal or led to treatment discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Sotorasib showed anticancer activity and had an acceptable safety profile in patients with KRAS p.G12C-mutated advanced pancreatic cancer who had received previous treatment. (Funded by Amgen and others; CodeBreaK 100 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03600883.).

Impact of Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) on the Outcomes of Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma (MPA) During First-Line Treatment With FOLFIRINOX: A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The role of primary prophylaxis (PP) with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA) treated with FOLFIRINOX is unknown. We aimed to compare the frequencies of grades 3 or 4 neutropenia (G3/4N) and febrile neutropenia (FN) and survival outcomes according to the use of PP.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study. We included patients with pathologically confirmed MPA treated with FOLFIRINOX in first-line. Patients who received primary prophylaxis (PP group) were compared to patients who received secondary or no G-CSF (no-PP group). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated using the standard Cox proportional hazard model. To account for potential biases, we performed sensitivity analyses excluding patients who received secondary prophilaxis and treating G-CSF as a time-dependent covariate in extended Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

The study population consisted of 123 patients. PP was used by 75 patients (61.0%). G3/4 N occurred more frequently among patients without PP (10.7 vs 41.7%; P < .001). There was no difference in the frequency of FN between groups (5.3 vs 8.3%; P = .710). In multivariate analysis, PP was associated with a trend toward improved OS (HR = .66; 95% confidence interval [95% CI] .41 - 1.07; P = .094). In the multivariate model excluding patients with secondary prophylaxis (HR = .54; 95% CI 0.32 - .91; P = .022) and in the time-dependent model (HR = .47; 95% CI 0.28 - .80; P = .005), PP was associated with statistically superior OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the reduction in the frequency of G3/4N, the risk of FN among patients treated with FOLFIRINOX without G-CSF is too low to justify its use in a routine basis. However, given the potential of G-CSF to improve survival in this setting, further studies are warranted to assess its role during treatment with FOLFIRINOX for patients with MPA.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management

The management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has evolved over the last two decades. Surgical resection remain the only potential cure for this cancer. Therefore, there is an emerging emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy to maximize the probability of resection, and identify failures early. The benefit of FOLFIRINOX in various clinical stages of PDAC have been practice changing. The addition of nab-paclitaxel to the traditional gemcitabine regimen added another option for treatment. In addition, immunotherapy and targeted therapies are applicable, based on molecular features and germline alterations; albeit, these are applicable to only a small minority of patients. In this review article, we discuss the key extant literature relevant to various stages of pancreatic cancer. We also summarize ongoing clinical trials which may guide future treatments.

Emerging Role of Targeted Therapy in Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

The aggressive biology of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), along with its limited sensitivity to many systemic therapies, presents a major challenge in the management of patients with metastatic PDAC. Over the past decade, the incorporation of combinatorial cytotoxic chemotherapy regimens has improved patient outcomes. Despite these advances, resistance to cytotoxic chemotherapy inevitably occurs, and there is a great need for effective therapies. A major focus of research has been to identify molecularly defined subpopulations of patients with PDAC who may benefit from targeted therapies that are matched to their molecular profile. Recent successes include the demonstration of the efficacy of maintenance PARP inhibition in PDAC tumors harboring deleterious BRCA1, BRCA2, and PALB2 alterations. In addition, while therapeutic targeting of KRAS was long thought to be infeasible, emerging data on the efficacy of KRAS G12C inhibitors have increased optimism about next-generation KRAS-directed therapies in PDAC. Meanwhile, KRAS wild-type PDAC encompasses a unique molecular subpopulation of PDAC that is enriched for targetable genetic alterations, such as oncogenic BRAF alterations, mismatch repair deficiency, and FGFR2, ALK, NTRK, ROS1, NRG1, and RET rearrangements. As more molecularly targeted therapies are developed, precision medicine has the potential to revolutionize the treatment of patients with metastatic PDAC.

A randomized phase II study of SM-88 plus methoxsalen, phenytoin, and sirolimus in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer treated in the second line and beyond

BACKGROUND

This trial explores SM-88 used with methoxsalen, phenytoin, and sirolimus (MPS) in pretreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) METHODS: Forty-nine patients were randomized to daily 460 or 920 mg oral SM-88 with MPS (SM-88 Regimen). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (RECIST 1.1).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients completed ≥ one cycle of SM-88 Regimen (response evaluable population). Disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) did not differ significantly between dose levels. Stable disease was achieved in 9/37 patients (DCR, 24.3%); there were no complete or partial responses. Quality-of-life (QOL) was maintained and trended in favor of 920 mg. SM-88 Regimen was well tolerated; a single patient (1/49) had related grade 3 and 4 adverse events, which later resolved. In the intention-to-treat population of 49 patients, the median overall survival (mOS) was 3.4 months (95% CI: 2.7-4.9 months). Those treated in the second line had an mOS of 8.1 months and a median PFS of 3.8 months. Survival was higher for patients with stable versus progressive disease (any line; mOS: 10.6 months vs. 3.9 months; p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

SM-88 Regimen has a favorable safety profile with encouraging QOL effects, disease control, and survival trends. This regimen should be explored in the second-line treatment of patients with mPDAC.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT03512756.

Current and emerging anti-angiogenic therapies in gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary cancers

Gastrointestinal tumours are a heterogeneous group of neoplasms that arise in the gastrointestinal tract and hepatobiliary system. Their incidence is rising globally and they currently represent the leading cause of cancer-related mortality worldwide. Anti-angiogenic agents have been incorporated into the treatment armamentarium of most of these malignancies and have improved survival outcomes, most notably in colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. New treatment combinations with immunotherapies and other agents have led to unprecedented benefits and are revolutionising patient care. In this review, we detail the mechanisms of action of anti-angiogenic agents and the preclinical rationale underlying their combinations with immunotherapies. We review the clinical evidence supporting their use across all gastrointestinal tumours, with a particular emphasis on colorectal cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma. We discuss available biomarkers of response to these therapies and their utility in routine clinical practice. Finally, we summarise ongoing clinical trials in distinct settings and highlight the preclinical rationale supporting novel combinations.

Cytotoxic Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Advanced pancreatic cancer remains one of the deadliest malignancies in 2022. Although there has been significant progress in treatment options with improved outcomes in many cancers, this growth has been slow in pancreatic cancer. This article examines specific components of approved first- and second-line therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer treatment and their effectiveness and concludes with a brief exploration of future directions for targeted therapies.

Nal-IRI/5-FU/LV versus modified FOLFIRINOX and FOLFIRI as second-line chemotherapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer: A single center retrospective study

BACKGROUND

The preferred regimen for unresectable pancreatic cancer following gemcitabine-based chemotherapy is not well-established. This study compared the efficacy of (ⅰ) liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) plus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV) (nal-IRI/5-FU/LV) versus modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) and (ⅱ) nal-IRI/5-FU/LV versus FOLFIRI, respectively, and the safety of the three regimens each other, as second-line chemotherapies for unresectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center analysis of all patients who were administered nal-IRI/5-FU/LV, mFFX, or FOLFIRI from December 2014 to July 2021 as second-line chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer. The primary endpoint was the overall survival (OS) of all patients, excluding those with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Regarding safety, we assessed the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events of interest in all patients.

RESULTS

A total of 137 patients (nal-IRI/5-FU/LV, n = 55; mFFX, n = 39; FOLFIRI, n = 43) were included. The median OS in the nal-IRI/5-FU/LV group, the mFFX group, and the FOLFIRI group was 7.4, 11.8, and 8.4 months, respectively. Compared with the nal-IRI/5-FU/LV group, the mFFX and FOLFIRI groups displayed a hazard ratio of 0.66 [95% confidence interval 0.40-1.08] and 0.87 [95% confidence interval 0.55-1.39], respectively. In the FOLFIRI group, the incidence of grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events tended to be low among all three groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the trend toward longer OS in the mFFX group and the lower incidence of adverse events in the FOLFIRI group, both mFFX and FOLFIRI, as well as nal-IRI/5-FU/LV, can be treatment options for second-line chemotherapy for unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Dual Targeting of the EGFR/HER2 Pathway in Combination with Systemic Chemotherapy in Refractory Pancreatic Cancer-The CONKO-008 Phase I Investigation

Background: Primary objective of this present trial was to define the maximum tolerable dose of lapatinib in combination with oxaliplatin, 5-fluorouracil, and folinic acid (OFF) in refractory pancreatic cancer. The secondary objective was to assess the safety and efficacy of lapatinib plus OFF. Methods: We conducted a phase I trial using an accelerated dose escalation design in patients with refractory pancreatic cancer. Lapatinib was given on days 1 to 42 in combination with folinic acid 200 mg/m² day + 5-fluorouracil 2000 mg/m² (24 h) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, and oxaliplatin 85 mg/m² days 8 and 22 of a 43-day cycle (OFF). Toxicity and efficacy were evaluated. Results: In total, eighteen patients were enrolled: dose level 1 (1000 mg) was assigned to seven patients, dose level 2 (1250 mg), five patients; and dose level 3 (1500 mg), six patients. Dose-limiting toxicities were diarrhea and/or neutropenic enterocolitis observed in two of six patients: one diarrhea III°, one diarrhea IV°, as well as neutropenic enterocolitis. The maximum tolerable dose of lapatinib was 1250 mg OD. Conclusions: The combination of lapatinib 1250 mg OD with platinum-containing chemotherapy is safe and feasible in patients with refractory pancreatic cancer and warrants further investigation.

Do antihypertensive drugs really have antitumor effects? Baseline differences in hypertensive and non-hypertensive patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

Although the antitumor effects of antihypertensive drugs for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) have been investigated, their efficacy remains unclear. Previous studies suggest that hypertensive (HT) patients with APC are significantly older than non-HT patients with APC, and that other major baseline differences in patient characteristics which may affect prognosis exist between HT and non-HT patients. It is also possible that antihypertensive drugs lack antitumor activity. Therefore, we herein retrospectively investigated the baseline differences between HT and non-HT patients with APC. From January 2015 to April 2020, 56 patients with APC received nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy at Higashiosaka City Medical Center (Higashiosaka, Japan). Of these 56 patients, 30 were diagnosed with hypertension (HT group); the remaining 26 did not have hypertension (non-HT group). Differences between the two groups were compared and prognostic factors were evaluated. Patients in the HT group had significantly less sarcopenia, a significantly larger body mass index, were significantly older, and significantly more likely to have a regular doctor and primary site in the body and tail of the pancreas than those in the non-HT group. Although no significant difference was found in the treatment response, patients in the HT group were significantly more likely to move to second-line chemotherapy than those in the non-HT group. Survival curves showed that median overall survival (OS) in the HT group was significantly longer (10.5 months) than in the non-HT group (6.8 months, P = .04). Multivariate analysis did not identify the use of antihypertensive drugs as an independent prognostic factor of OS. We identified key baseline differences in the characteristics of APC patients with and without HT, suggesting that major selection bias could occur when investigating the efficacy of antihypertensive drugs in all populations. Therefore, it is possible that antihypertensive drugs lack antitumor activity. To determine the true efficacy of antihypertensive drugs for APC, HT, and non-HT patients in another population should be investigated, or a prospective, randomized, controlled trial conducted that is stratified by HT or non-HT status.

Case Report: A Case of Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Which Achieved Progression Free for Over 12 Months by Subsequent Therapy with Anlotinib Hydrochloride Plus Tegafur-Gimeracil-Oteracil Potassium (TS-1)

Titled the “most destructive of all cancers”, pancreatic cancer is a malignant tumor with a very poor prognosis and has a poor response to systemic therapy. At present, several studies have shown that tegafur-gimeracil-oteracil potassium (hereinafter referred to as TS-1) is no less superior to gemcitabine in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a number of current clinical studies have shown that targeted therapy combined with chemotherapy reflects therapeutic advantages in pancreatic cancer. Moreover, in vitro and in vivo experiments have also demonstrated that anlotinib can curb the proliferation of pancreatic cancer cells and induce their apoptosis. Here, we report for the first time that a patient with locally advanced pancreatic cancer achieved good efficacy after switching to TS-1 chemotherapy combined with anlotinib targeted therapy. Previously, the disease of the patient still rapidly progressed without control following the first switch to abraxane combined with gemcitabine chemotherapy (AG regimen) due to the progression after chemo-radiotherapy. In this case, the patient achieved progression-free survival (PFS) of over 14 months via the treatment with anlotinib targeted therapy combined with TS-1 chemotherapy and secondary radiotherapy (prior to secondary radiotherapy, the patient achieved a PFS of nearly 12 months via the treatment with oral anlotinib combined with TS-1). Up to now, the progress of the disease is ceased. The oral administration of targeted therapy and chemotherapy are still in progress and the general condition of the patient is good. This suggests that patients with advanced pancreatic cancer may benefit from treatment with the anlotinib targeted therapy combined with TS-1 chemotherapy.

Germline Aberrations in Pancreatic Cancer: Implications for Clinical Care

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an extremely poor prognosis and represents a major public health issue, as both its incidence and mortality are expecting to increase steeply over the next years. Effective screening strategies are lacking, and most patients are diagnosed with unresectable disease precluding the only chance of cure. Therapeutic options for advanced disease are limited, and the treatment paradigm is still based on chemotherapy, with a few rare exceptions to targeted therapies. Germline variants in cancer susceptibility genes-particularly those involved in mechanisms of DNA repair-are emerging as promising targets for PDAC treatment and prevention. Hereditary PDAC is part of the spectrum of several syndromic disorders, and germline testing of PDAC patients has relevant implications for broad cancer prevention. Germline aberrations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are predictive biomarkers of response to poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib and platinum-based chemotherapy in PDAC, while mutations in mismatch repair genes identify patients suitable for immune checkpoint inhibitors. This review provides a timely and comprehensive overview of germline aberrations in PDAC and their implications for clinical care. It also discusses the need for optimal approaches to better select patients for PARP inhibitor therapy, novel therapeutic opportunities under clinical investigation, and preclinical models for cancer susceptibility and drug discovery.

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

BACKGROUND

Gemcitabine (Gem) alone or with Nab-paclitaxel (Gem-Nab) is used as second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA) after FOLFIRINOX (FFX) failure; however, no comparative data exist. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of adding Nab-paclitaxel to Gem for mPA after FFX failure.

METHODS

In this retrospective real-world multicenter study, from 2011 to 2019, patients with mPA receiving Gem-Nab (Gem 1000 mg/m² + Nab 125 mg/m², 3 out of 4 weeks) or Gem alone were included after progression on FFX.

RESULTS

A total of 427 patients were included. Patients receiving Gem-Nab had more metastatic sites, peritoneal disease and less PS 2 (24% vs. 35%). After median follow-up of 22 months, Gem-Nab was associated with better disease control rate (DCR) (56% vs. 32%; P < 0.001), progression-free survival (PFS) (3.5 vs. 2.3 months; 95% CI: 0.43-0.65) and overall survival (OS) (7.1 vs. 4.7 months; 95% CI: 0.53-0.86). After multivariate analysis, Gem-Nab and PS 0/1 were associated with better OS and PFS. Grade 3/4 toxicity was more frequent with Gem-Nab (44% vs. 29%).

CONCLUSION

In this study, Gem-Nab was associated with better DCR, PFS and OS compared with Gem alone in patients with mPA after FFX failure, at the cost of higher toxicity.

Systemic Therapy of Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Current Status, Challenges, and Opportunities

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy characterized by nonspecific presenting symptoms, lack of a screening test, rapidly progressive clinical course, and presentation with an advanced-stage disease in the majority of patients. PDAC is essentially a systemic disease irrespective of the initial stage, as most patients with non-metastatic PDAC undergoing curative-intent treatment eventually experience metastatic relapse. Currently, cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment in patients with advanced disease. However, the current standard treatment with multiagent chemotherapy has modest efficacy and results in median overall survival (OS) of less than a year and a 5-year OS of about 10%. The pathobiology of PDAC poses many challenges, including a unique tumor microenvironment interfering with drug delivery, intratumoral heterogeneity, and a strongly immunosuppressive microenvironment that supports cancer growth. Recent research is exploring a wide range of novel therapeutic targets, including genomic alterations, tumor microenvironment, and tumor metabolism. The rapid evolution of tumor genome sequencing technologies paves the way for personalized, targeted therapies. The present review summarizes the current chemotherapeutic treatment paradigm of advanced PDAC and discusses the evolving novel targets that are being investigated in a myriad of clinical trials.

5-Fluorouracil/L-Leucovorin Plus Oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) Regimen as Salvage Chemotherapy for Patients with Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Gemcitabine and Nab-Paclitaxel and 5-Fluorouracil/L-Leucovorin Plus Nanoliposomal Irinotecan: Preliminary Results from Clinical Practice

Salvage chemotherapy for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer (UR-PC) who have been treated with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GnP), and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/l-leucovorin (LV) plus nanoliposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI), has not been fully established. We retrospectively reviewed data from 17 patients with UR-PC who initiated 5-FU/l-LV plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) as salvage chemotherapy at our hospital between June 2020 and August 2021, after treatment with GnP and 5-FU/LV plus nal-IRI. The primary endpoint was tumor response. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and adverse events (AEs). The response and disease control rates were 5.9% (1/17) and 17.6% (3/17), respectively. The median PFS was 1.8 months (range: 0.4-5.2 months). Eight patients (47.1%) experienced grade 3 nonhematologic AEs, while none experienced grade 3 hematologic AEs. Two patients with controlled disease had homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-associated gene mutations in cancer panel testing. The FOLFOX regimen benefit for UR-PC patients treated with GnP and 5-FU/LV plus nal-IRI may be limited to patients with HRD-associated gene mutations.

Potential roles of exosomal non-coding RNAs in chemoresistance in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the deadliest digestive system tumors in the world, primarily attributed to difficulty in early diagnosis, early metastasis, and insen-sitivity to chemotherapy. The survival of advanced PC patients can be improved by chemotherapy, including gemcitabine, platinum drugs, and 5-fluorouracil, and targeted therapy such as PARP inhibitors. Nevertheless, primary or acquired drug resistance ultimately leads to treatment failure and poor prognosis in patients with PC. The mechanism underlying drug resistance in PC is complex and has not been fully elucidated. Recent studies have indicated that exsomes are the best natural carrier of non-coding RNAs (ncRNAs). They can regulate drug resistance by transporting ncRNAs. Accumulating evidence has demonstrated that exosomal ncRNAs, including microRNAs (miRNAs), long noncoding RNAs (lncRNAs), and circular RNAs (circRNAs), play an crucial role in regulating resistance to chemotherapy drugs in PC. In this review, we systematically focus on the emerging role and regulatory mechanisms of exosomal ncRNAs in influencing chemotherapy resistance in PC. We believe that exosomal ncRNAs can be considered as potential biomarkers for the diagnosis and prognosis of PC as well as new therapeutic targets.

Baseline Factors Predictive of the Receipt of Second-Line Chemotherapy After Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine for Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVE

Second-line (2L) chemotherapy is important for improved survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). However, approximately half of patients with APC do not receive 2L chemotherapy because of disease progression or adverse events. Baseline factors predictive of the receipt of 2L chemotherapy remain unknown. Therefore, we investigated predictive factors for the receipt of 2L chemotherapy in patients with APC.

METHODS

Between January 2015 and March 2020, 53 patients with APC received nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (AG) as first-line chemotherapy at our institute. Of these 53 patients, 29 patients received 2L chemotherapy, and 23 patients received best supportive care. Patients' characteristics were compared retrospectively, and predictive factors for the receipt of 2L chemotherapy were evaluated.

RESULTS

Sarcopenia and hypoalbuminemia at baseline were independent negative predictive factors for the receipt of 2L chemotherapy in multivariate analysis. Although the presence of sarcopenia did not affect the relative dose intensity through 8 weeks of AG therapy, patients with hypoalbuminemia had a significantly lower relative dose intensity.

CONCLUSIONS

Sarcopenia and hypoalbuminemia at baseline might be negative predictive factors for the receipt of 2L chemotherapy after AG treatment in patients with APC.

Modified FOLFIRINOX versus sequential chemotherapy (FOLFIRI/FOLFOX) as a second-line treatment regimen for unresectable pancreatic cancer: A real-world analysis

BACKGROUND

Although second-line treatment for pancreatic cancer has been proven to have survival benefit, it is not clear which is the most preferred regimen. This study compared the efficacy and safety of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) and sequential chemotherapy (FOLFIRI/FOLFOX) as a second-line treatment regimen for unresectable pancreatic cancer.

METHOD

This was a retrospective single-center analysis of all patients who initiated treatment with mFOLFIRINOX or sequential chemotherapy from December 2014 to May 2019 as a second-line treatment for unresectable pancreatic cancer. The sequential chemotherapy group included all patients who initiated sequential chemotherapy. For efficacy analysis, the primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) of all patients, excluding those with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. For safety analysis, we assessed the incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events in all patients.

RESULTS

Seventy-four patients (mFOLFIRINOX group, n = 44; sequential chemotherapy group, n = 30) were included. OS tended to be slightly prolonged in the mFOLFIRINOX group than in the sequential chemotherapy group (median 10.6 [95% confidence interval {CI} 5.9-13.8] vs. 8.5 [95% CI 5.0-12.2] months; hazard ratio 1.40 [95% CI 0.71-2.71]). The objective response rate and disease control rate were 8.1% and 64.9%, respectively, in the mFOLFIRINOX group and 3.8% and 42.3%, respectively, in the sequential chemotherapy group. In safety analysis, the grade ≥3 rates of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and anorexia were 40.9%, 6.8%, and 18.2%, respectively, in the mFOLFIRINOX group and 3.3%, 0%, and 3.3%, respectively, in the sequential chemotherapy group.

CONCLUSIONS

Whereas efficacy tended to be slightly better in the mFOLFIRINOX group than in the sequential chemotherapy group, given the higher incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events with mFOLFIRINOX than with sequential chemotherapy, sequential chemotherapy is a regimen with better risk-benefit balance than mFOLFIRINOX, and can be considered a second-line treatment option for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.