RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Identifying pretreatment blood markers that distinguish prognostic groups of patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) under first-line FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy has the potential to improve management of this condition. Aim of this study was to determine the prognostic utility of a range of pretreatment, inflammation-related, blood cell markers in this group of patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from a training cohort were analyzed to identify potential pretreatment blood markers correlating to survival outcomes. The most informative markers were further analyzed in a validation cohort comprised patients from a geographically separate cancer center undergoing the same treatment. RESULTS: A total of 138 consecutive patients receiving FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy between 2010 and 2019, constituted the training cohort. Neutrophil/lymphocyte (NLR), monocyte/lymphocyte (MLR), and platelet/lymphocyte ratio (PLR) as well as the systemic inflammatory response index (SIRI) and CA19.9 showed prognostic significance in addition to tumor stage. A pretreatment SIRI score cutoff of 2.35 differentiated between a poor prognostic group with median overall survival (mOS) 5.1 months and a better prognostic group, mOS 12.5 months. SIRI ≤/> 2.35 was predictive of mOS in patients with locally advanced and metastatic PDAC. SIRI was confirmed as a prognostic marker in a validation cohort of 67 patients with mOS of 13.4 months and 6.3 months for those with SIRI ≤ 2.35 and >2.35, respectively. Additional analysis revealed baseline SIRI as being prognostic within additional subgroups of patients in both cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: This large, retrospective, analysis of real-world patients receiving first-line FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy for advanced PDAC has identified the pretreatment blood SIRI as a strong prognostic marker for survival. This will allow better counseling of patients with regards to the benefits of treatment, improved stratification within clinical trials, and potentially identify groups of patients for novel therapy trials as first-line treatment.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores , Fluorouracilo , Humanos , Inflamación/patología , Irinotecán , Leucovorina , Oxaliplatino , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Pronóstico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Advanced biliary tract cancer has a poor prognosis. Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen, but no robust evidence is available for second-line chemotherapy. The aim of this study was to determine the benefit derived from second-line FOLFOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, and oxaliplatin) chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. METHODS: The ABC-06 clinical trial was a phase 3, open-label, randomised trial done in 20 sites with expertise in managing biliary tract cancer across the UK. Adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically or cytologically verified locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (including cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder or ampullary carcinoma) with documented radiological disease progression to first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally to active symptom control (ASC) and FOLFOX or ASC alone. FOLFOX chemotherapy was administered intravenously every 2 weeks for a maximum of 12 cycles (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, L-folinic acid 175 mg [or folinic acid 350 mg], fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 [bolus], and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 as a 46-h continuous intravenous infusion). Randomisation was done following a minimisation algorithm using platinum sensitivity, serum albumin concentration, and stage as stratification factors. The primary endpoint was overall survival, assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was also assessed in the intention-to-treat population. The study is complete and the final results are reported. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01926236, and EudraCT, 2013-001812-30. FINDINGS: Between March 27, 2014, and Jan 4, 2018, 162 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to ASC plus FOLFOX (n=81) or ASC alone (n=81). Median follow-up was 21·7 months (IQR 17·2-30·8). Overall survival was significantly longer in the ASC plus FOLFOX group than in the ASC alone group, with a median overall survival of 6·2 months (95% CI 5·4-7·6) in the ASC plus FOLFOX group versus 5·3 months (4·1-5·8) in the ASC alone group (adjusted hazard ratio 0·69 [95% CI 0·50-0·97]; p=0·031). The overall survival rate in the ASC alone group was 35·5% (95% CI 25·2-46·0) at 6 months and 11·4% (5·6-19·5) at 12 months, compared with 50·6% (39·3-60·9) at 6 months and 25·9% (17·0-35·8) at 12 months in the ASC plus FOLFOX group. Grade 3-5 adverse events were reported in 42 (52%) of 81 patients in the ASC alone group and 56 (69%) of 81 patients in the ASC plus FOLFOX group, including three chemotherapy-related deaths (one each due to infection, acute kidney injury, and febrile neutropenia). The most frequently reported grade 3-5 FOLFOX-related adverse events were neutropenia (ten [12%] patients), fatigue or lethargy (nine [11%] patients), and infection (eight [10%] patients). INTERPRETATION: The addition of FOLFOX to ASC improved median overall survival in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer after progression on cisplatin and gemcitabine, with a clinically meaningful increase in 6-month and 12-month overall survival rates. To our knowledge, this trial is the first prospective, randomised study providing reliable, high-quality evidence to allow an informed discussion with patients of the potential benefits and risks from second-line FOLFOX chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer. Based on these findings, FOLFOX should become standard-of-care chemotherapy in second-line treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer and the reference regimen for further clinical trials. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, StandUpToCancer, AMMF (The UK Cholangiocarcinoma Charity), and The Christie Charity, with additional funding from The Cholangiocarcinoma Foundation and the Conquer Cancer Foundation Young Investigator Award for translational research.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/mortalidad , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/efectos adversos , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Leucovorina/efectos adversos , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Compuestos Organoplatinos/efectos adversos , Compuestos Organoplatinos/uso terapéutico , Estudios ProspectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Xentuzumab, an insulin-like growth factor (IGF)-1/IGF-2-neutralising antibody, binds IGF-1 and IGF-2, inhibiting their growth-promoting signalling. Two first-in-human trials assessed the maximum-tolerated/relevant biological dose (MTD/RBD), safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and activity of xentuzumab in advanced/metastatic solid cancers. METHODS: These phase 1, open-label trials comprised dose-finding (part I; 3 + 3 design) and expansion cohorts (part II; selected tumours; RBD [weekly dosing]). Primary endpoints were MTD/RBD. RESULTS: Study 1280.1 involved 61 patients (part I: xentuzumab 10-1800 mg weekly, n = 48; part II: 1000 mg weekly, n = 13); study 1280.2, 64 patients (part I: 10-3600 mg three-weekly, n = 33; part II: 1000 mg weekly, n = 31). One dose-limiting toxicity occurred; the MTD was not reached for either schedule. Adverse events were generally grade 1/2, mostly gastrointestinal. Xentuzumab showed dose-proportional pharmacokinetics. Total plasma IGF-1 increased dose dependently, plateauing at ~1000 mg/week; at ≥450 mg/week, IGF bioactivity was almost undetectable. Two partial responses occurred (poorly differentiated nasopharyngeal carcinoma and peripheral primitive neuroectodermal tumour). Integration of biomarker and response data by Bayesian Logistic Regression Modeling (BLRM) confirmed the RBD. CONCLUSIONS: Xentuzumab was well tolerated; MTD was not reached. RBD was 1000 mg weekly, confirmed by BLRM. Xentuzumab showed preliminary anti-tumour activity. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01403974; NCT01317420.
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/administración & dosificación , Factor II del Crecimiento Similar a la Insulina/antagonistas & inhibidores , Factor I del Crecimiento Similar a la Insulina/antagonistas & inhibidores , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/inmunología , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/administración & dosificación , Anticuerpos Neutralizantes/inmunología , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Femenino , Humanos , Factor I del Crecimiento Similar a la Insulina/inmunología , Factor II del Crecimiento Similar a la Insulina/inmunología , Masculino , Dosis Máxima Tolerada , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/genética , Neoplasias/patología , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Capecitabine and eribulin are widely used as single agents in metastatic breast cancer (MBC) and have nonoverlapping toxicities. METHODS: In phase 1b (dose escalation), patients with advanced, treatment-refractory, solid tumours received eribulin mesilate intravenously in 21-day cycles according to schedule 1 (day 1) or schedule 2 (days 1, 8) with twice-daily oral capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 days 1-14). In phase 2 (dose confirmation), women with advanced/MBC and ≤3 prior chemotherapies received eribulin mesilate at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) per the preferred schedule plus capecitabine. Primary objectives were MTD and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; phase 1b) and objective response rate (ORR; phase 2). Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: DLTs occurred in 4/19 patients (schedule 1) and 2/15 patients (schedule 2). Eribulin pharmacokinetics were dose proportional, irrespective of schedule or capecitabine coadministration. The MTD of eribulin was 1.6 mg/m2 day 1 for schedule 1 and 1.4 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 for schedule 2. ORR in phase 2 (eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 days 1, 8 plus capecitabine) was 43% and median PFS 7.2 months. The most common treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia, leukopenia, alopecia, nausea, and lethargy. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of capecitabine and eribulin showed promising efficacy with manageable tolerability in patients with MBC.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/farmacocinética , Capecitabina/administración & dosificación , Capecitabina/efectos adversos , Capecitabina/farmacocinética , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Esquema de Medicación , Femenino , Furanos/administración & dosificación , Furanos/efectos adversos , Furanos/farmacocinética , Humanos , Cetonas/administración & dosificación , Cetonas/efectos adversos , Cetonas/farmacocinética , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias/metabolismo , Supervivencia sin ProgresiónRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies. METHODS: Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1âmm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1âmm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.
Asunto(s)
Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Márgenes de Escisión , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/etiología , Pancreatectomía , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidad , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patología , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Desoxicitidina/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Humanos , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Pronóstico , Estudios Prospectivos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Análisis de Supervivencia , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC) has a poor prognosis. Cediranib, in addition to cisplatin/gemcitabine [CisGem], improved the response rate, but did not improve the progression-free survival (PFS) in the ABC-03 study. Minimally invasive biomarkers predictive of cediranib benefit may improve patient outcomes. METHODS: Changes in 15 circulating plasma angiogenesis or inflammatory-related proteins and cytokeratin-18 (CK18), measured at baseline and during therapy until disease progression, were correlated with overall survival (OS) using time-varying covariate Cox models (TVC). RESULTS: Samples were available from n = 117/124 (94%) patients. Circulating Ang1&2, FGFb, PDGFbb, VEGFC, VEGFR1 and CK18 decreased as a result of the therapy, independent of treatment with cediranib. Circulating VEGFR2 and Tie2 were preferentially reduced by cediranib. Patients with increasing levels of VEGFA at any time had a worse PFS and OS; this detrimental effect was attenuated in patients receiving cediranib. TVC analysis revealed CK18 and VEGFR2 increases correlated with poorer OS in all patients (P < 0.001 and P = 0.02, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Rising circulating VEGFA levels in patients with ABC, treated with CisGem, are associated with worse PFS and OS, not seen in patients receiving cediranib. Rising levels of markers of tumour burden (CK18) and potential resistance (VEGFR2) are associated with worse outcomes and warrant validation.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/tratamiento farmacológico , Queratina-18/sangre , Factor A de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/sangre , Receptor 2 de Factores de Crecimiento Endotelial Vascular/sangre , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/sangre , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/patología , Biomarcadores de Tumor/sangre , Cisplatino/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Proteínas de Neoplasias/sangre , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/metabolismo , Células Neoplásicas Circulantes/patología , Quinazolinas/administración & dosificación , Resultado del Tratamiento , Reino Unido , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) tumour expression may provide added value to human equilibrative nucleoside transporter-1 (hENT1) tumour expression in predicting survival following pyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy. METHODS: DPD and hENT1 immunohistochemistry and scoring was completed on tumour cores from 238 patients with pancreatic cancer in the ESPAC-3(v2) trial, randomised to either postoperative gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid (5FU/FA). RESULTS: DPD tumour expression was associated with reduced overall survival (hazard ratio, HR = 1.73 [95% confidence interval, CI = 1.21-2.49], p = 0.003). This was significant in the 5FU/FA arm (HR = 2.07 [95% CI = 1.22-3.53], p = 0.007), but not in the gemcitabine arm (HR = 1.47 [0.91-3.37], p = 0.119). High hENT1 tumour expression was associated with increased survival in gemcitabine treated (HR = 0.56 [0.38-0.82], p = 0.003) but not in 5FU/FA treated patients (HR = 1.19 [0.80-1.78], p = 0.390). In patients with low hENT1 tumour expression, high DPD tumour expression was associated with a worse median [95% CI] survival in the 5FU/FA arm (9.7 [5.3-30.4] vs 29.2 [19.5-41.9] months, p = 0.002) but not in the gemcitabine arm (14.0 [9.1-15.7] vs. 18.0 [7.6-15.3] months, p = 1.000). The interaction of treatment arm and DPD expression was not significant (p = 0.303), but the interaction of treatment arm and hENT1 expression was (p = 0.009). CONCLUSION: DPD tumour expression was a negative prognostic biomarker. Together with tumour expression of hENT1, DPD tumour expression defined patient subgroups that might benefit from either postoperative 5FU/FA or gemcitabine.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico , Dihidrouracilo Deshidrogenasa (NADP)/metabolismo , Tranportador Equilibrativo 1 de Nucleósido/metabolismo , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores de Tumor/metabolismo , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/metabolismo , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidad , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Inmunohistoquímica , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/metabolismo , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Pronóstico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Análisis de Supervivencia , Análisis de Matrices Tisulares , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.
Asunto(s)
Antimetabolitos Antineoplásicos/administración & dosificación , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Capecitabina/administración & dosificación , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antimetabolitos Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Capecitabina/efectos adversos , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidad , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/efectos adversos , Femenino , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Resultado del Tratamiento , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Thromboembolic events (TEEs) represent a significant treatment and disease complication for cancer patients. In the present study we assessed the incidence of TEEs in patients receiving preoperative chemotherapy for esophagogastric adenocarcinoma. The risk factors for TEE development and their impact on prognosis were further analyzed. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Data from 590 patients with esophagogastric adenocarcinoma, who received preoperative epirubicin-cisplatin with capecitabine (ECX) or 5-fluorouracil (ECF) between 2009 and 2016 in three UK hospitals were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: Twenty-one percent had stomach primary and 98% received ECX chemotherapy. In total, 52 patients (9%) had a venous and 22 (4%) an arterial event. Of those patients with venous TEEs (vTTEs), 39 had pulmonary embolism and 13 deep vein thrombosis, whereas in patients with arterial TEEs (arTTEs), 7 developed a myocardial infarct, 8 developed limb ischemia, 4 developed cerebrovascular accidents and 3 developed superior mesenteric artery thrombosis. ArTEEs were associated with a much higher inoperability rate compared to cases without TEE or with vTEE (77% vs. 20% vs. 31%, respectively, p < .001). Independent risk factors of vTEEs were primary site being the stomach (Odds ratio [OR] 3.24, 95%CI 1.72-6.12, p < .001), being overweight (OR 3.11, 95%CI 1.33-7.26, p = .009) or obese (OR 4.52, 95%CI 1.85-11.09, p = .001) and the presence of central venous access device (OR 3.40, 95%CI 1.00-11.55, p = .050). In contrast, anticoagulant treatment was independently associated with a lower risk of vTEE (OR 0.22, 95%CI 0.06-0.83, p = .026). Khorana score of 4-5 was an independent risk factor of arTEE (OR 6.38, 95%CI 1.85-22.04, p = .003). Finally, arTEEs were an independent poor prognostic factor for OS, when adjusted for baseline patient, tumor and treatment characteristics (Hazard ratio 3.02, 95%CI 1.85-4.95, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Preoperative ECX/ECF chemotherapy for patients with resectable esophagogastric adenocarcinoma was associated with relatively high incidence of TEEs. However, only arTEEs affected patient survival outcomes.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Esofágicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Terapia Neoadyuvante/efectos adversos , Tromboembolia/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Quimioterapia Adyuvante/métodos , Estudios de Cohortes , Unión Esofagogástrica/patología , Femenino , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Terapia Neoadyuvante/métodos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Neoplasias Gástricas/tratamiento farmacológico , Tromboembolia/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The ABC-02 (Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer) study established cisplatin and gemcitabine (CisGem) as the standard first-line chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer (BTC). We examine quality of life (QoL), describe the long-term survivors and provide a long-term outcome. METHODS: A total of 410 BTC patients were randomised to receive either CisGem or gemcitabine alone (Gem); 324 patients consented to complete EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-PAN26 QoL questionnaires; 268 (83%) patients returned at least one QoL questionnaire (134 in each arm). Long-term survivors were defined as those surviving over 2 years and we performed a final analysis of the primary outcome; overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Most QoL scales showed a trend favouring the combined CisGem arm, including functional and symptomatic scales, although the differences were not statistically significant. Forty-five (11%)) patients survived at least 2 years (34 received CisGem and 11 Gem) and 21 (5%) 3 years or more (14 received CisGem and 7 Gem). After a median follow-up of 9.2 months and 398 deaths, the median OS was 11.7 months for CisGem and 8.1 months for Gem (hazard ratio (HR)=0.65, 95% CI: 0.53-0.79, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The survival advantage of CisGem compared to Gem was not associated with an improvement or deterioration of QoL. Long-term survivors were more likely to have received CisGem and the long-term OS is identical to that previously described.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/mortalidad , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/tratamiento farmacológico , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Calidad de Vida , Sobrevivientes , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of sequential or simultaneous telomerase vaccination (GV1001) in combination with chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: TeloVac was a three-group, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial. We recruited patients from 51 UK hospitals. Eligible patients were treatment naive, aged older than 18 years, with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive either chemotherapy alone, chemotherapy with sequential GV1001 (sequential chemoimmunotherapy), or chemotherapy with concurrent GV1001 (concurrent chemoimmunotherapy). Treatments were allocated with equal probability by means of computer-generated random permuted blocks of sizes 3 and 6 in equal proportion. Chemotherapy included six cycles of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2), 30 min intravenous infusion, at days 1, 8, and 15) and capecitabine (830 mg/m(2) orally twice daily for 21 days, repeated every 28 days). Sequential chemoimmunotherapy included two cycles of combination chemotherapy, then an intradermal lower abdominal injection of granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF; 75 µg) and GV1001 (0·56 mg; days 1, 3, and 5, once on weeks 2-4, and six monthly thereafter). Concurrent chemoimmunotherapy included giving GV1001 from the start of chemotherapy with GM-CSF as an adjuvant. The primary endpoint was overall survival; analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN4382138. FINDINGS: The first patient was randomly assigned to treatment on March 29, 2007, and the trial was terminated on March 27, 2011. Of 1572 patients screened, 1062 were randomly assigned to treatment (358 patients were allocated to the chemotherapy group, 350 to the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 354 to the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group). We recorded 772 deaths; the 290 patients still alive were followed up for a median of 6·0 months (IQR 2·4-12·2). Median overall survival was not significantly different in the chemotherapy group than in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group (7·9 months [95% CI 7·1-8·8] vs 6·9 months [6·4-7·6]; hazard ratio [HR] 1·19, 98·25% CI 0·97-1·48, p=0·05), or in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group (8·4 months [95% CI 7·3-9·7], HR 1·05, 98·25% CI 0·85-1·29, p=0·64; overall log-rank of χ(2)2df=4·3; p=0·11). The commonest grade 3-4 toxic effects were neutropenia (68 [19%] patients in the chemotherapy group, 58 [17%] patients in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 79 [22%] patients in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group; fatigue (27 [8%] in the chemotherapy group, 35 [10%] in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 44 [12%] in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group); and pain (34 [9%] patients in the chemotherapy group, 39 [11%] in the sequential chemoimmunotherapy group, and 41 [12%] in the concurrent chemoimmunotherapy group). INTERPRETATION: Adding GV1001 vaccination to chemotherapy did not improve overall survival. New strategies to enhance the immune response effect of telomerase vaccination during chemotherapy are required for clinical efficacy. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and KAEL-GemVax.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Vacunas contra el Cáncer/administración & dosificación , Conductos Pancreáticos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Fragmentos de Péptidos/administración & dosificación , Telomerasa/administración & dosificación , Adenocarcinoma/secundario , Anciano , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Vacunas contra el Cáncer/efectos adversos , Capecitabina , Proliferación Celular , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Fatiga/inducido químicamente , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Fluorouracilo/análogos & derivados , Factor Estimulante de Colonias de Granulocitos y Macrófagos/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Factores Inmunológicos/administración & dosificación , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neutropenia/inducido químicamente , Dolor/inducido químicamente , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Fragmentos de Péptidos/efectos adversos , Linfocitos T/inmunología , Telomerasa/efectos adversos , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: There is no established standard chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer. We initially conducted a randomized, phase 2 study involving 86 patients to compare cisplatin plus gemcitabine with gemcitabine alone. After we found an improvement in progression-free survival, the trial was extended to the phase 3 trial reported here. METHODS: We randomly assigned 410 patients with locally advanced or metastatic cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, or ampullary cancer to receive either cisplatin (25 mg per square meter of body-surface area) followed by gemcitabine (1000 mg per square meter on days 1 and 8, every 3 weeks for eight cycles) or gemcitabine alone (1000 mg per square meter on days 1, 8, and 15, every 4 weeks for six cycles) for up to 24 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 8.2 months and 327 deaths, the median overall survival was 11.7 months among the 204 patients in the cisplatin-gemcitabine group and 8.1 months among the 206 patients in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.52 to 0.80; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 8.0 months in the cisplatin-gemcitabine group and 5.0 months in the gemcitabine-only group (P<0.001). In addition, the rate of tumor control among patients in the cisplatin-gemcitabine group was significantly increased (81.4% vs. 71.8%, P=0.049). Adverse events were similar in the two groups, with the exception of more neutropenia in the cisplatin-gemcitabine group; the number of neutropenia-associated infections was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: As compared with gemcitabine alone, cisplatin plus gemcitabine was associated with a significant survival advantage without the addition of substantial toxicity. Cisplatin plus gemcitabine is an appropriate option for the treatment of patients with advanced biliary cancer. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00262769.)
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/tratamiento farmacológico , Cisplatino/uso terapéutico , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Antimetabolitos Antineoplásicos/efectos adversos , Antimetabolitos Antineoplásicos/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias del Sistema Biliar/mortalidad , Cisplatino/efectos adversos , Desoxicitidina/efectos adversos , Desoxicitidina/uso terapéutico , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Estimación de Kaplan-Meier , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neutropenia/inducido químicamente , Cooperación del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: This was a Phase I/II trial of the novel checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibitor SRA737 given in combination with gemcitabine. Its objectives were to establish the safety profile, recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics profile, and clinical activity of SRA737. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled into dose-escalation cohorts and treated in 28-day cycles with oral SRA737 on days 2, 3, 9, 10, 16, and 17, and intravenous gemcitabine on days 1, 8, and 15. Treatment was continued until progression. Each expansion cohort included up to 20 patients with specific genetically defined tumors. RESULTS: The RP2D was determined to be 500 mg SRA737 combined with low-dose (250 mg/m2) gemcitabine. Of 143 enrolled patients, 77 were treated at doses of at least 500 mg SRA737 combined with 250 mg/m2 gemcitabine. Common toxicities of nausea, vomiting, fatigue, and diarrhea were primarily mild to moderate, and rarely led to treatment discontinuation. Anemia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia were grade ≥3 in 11.7%, 16.7%, and 10% of patients treated at the RP2D, respectively. The objective response rate (ORR) was 10.8% overall and notably the ORR in anogenital cancer was 25%. Partial tumor responses were observed in anogenital cancer, cervical cancer, high-grade serous ovarian cancer, rectal cancer, and small cell lung cancer. CONCLUSIONS: SRA737 in combination with low-dose gemcitabine was well tolerated with lower myelotoxicity than has been seen at standard doses of gemcitabine or with other combinations of Chk1 inhibitors with gemcitabine. Tumor responses were observed in anogenital and other solid tumors.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pulmonares , Neoplasias , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células Pequeñas , Humanos , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Gemcitabina , Neoplasias Pulmonares/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias/etiología , Carcinoma Pulmonar de Células Pequeñas/tratamiento farmacológicoRESUMEN
Background: The prognosis for patients with poorly-differentiated extra-pulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma (PD-EP-NEC) is poor. A recognised first-line (1L) treatment for advanced disease is etoposide/platinum-based chemotherapy with no standard second-line (2L) treatment. Methods: Patients with histologically-confirmed PD-EP-NEC (Ki-67 > 20%; Grade 3) received IV liposomal irinotecan (nal-IRI) (70 mg/m2 free base)/5-FU (2400 mg/m2)/folinic acid, Q14 days (ARM A), or IV docetaxel (75 mg/m2), Q21 days (ARM B), as 2L therapy. Primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate (80% power to demonstrate one-sided 95% lower confidence interval excluded 15% (target level of efficacy: 30%)). Secondary endpoints: objective response rate (ORR), median PFS, overall survival (OS), toxicity and patient-reported quality-of-life (QoL) (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03837977). Findings: Of 58 patients (29 each arm); 57% male, 90% ECOG PS 0/1, 10% PS 2, 89.7% Ki-67 ≥ 55%, primary site: 70.7%-gastrointestinal, 18.9%-other, 10.3%-unknown, 91.4%/6.9%/1.7% were resistant/sensitive/intolerant to 1L platinum-based treatment, respectively. The primary end-point of 6-month PFS rate was met by ARM A: 29.6% (lower 95% Confidence-Limit (CL) 15.7), but not by ARM B: 13.8% (lower 95%CL:4.9). ORR, median PFS and OS were 11.1% (95%CI:2.4-29.2) and 10.3% (95%CI:2.2-27.4%); 3 months (95%CI:2-6) and 2 months (95%CI:2-2); and 6 months (95%CI:3-10) and 6 months (95%CI:3-9) in ARMS A and B, respectively. Adverse events ≥ grade 3 occurred in 51.7% and 55.2% (1 and 6 discontinuations due to toxicity in ARMS A and B), respectively. QoL was maintained in ARM A, but not ARM B. Interpretation: nal-IRI/5-FU/folinic acid, but not docetaxel, met the primary endpoint, with manageable toxicity and maintained QoL, with no difference in OS. ORR and median PFS were similar in both arms. This study provides prospective efficacy, toxicity and QoL data in the 2L setting in a disease group of unmet need, and represents some of the strongest evidence available to recommend systemic treatment to these patients. Funding: Servier.
RESUMEN
CONTEXT: Patients with periampullary adenocarcinomas undergo the same resectional surgery as that of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Although adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to have a survival benefit for pancreatic cancer, there have been no randomized trials for periampullary adenocarcinomas. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether adjuvant chemotherapy (fluorouracil or gemcitabine) provides improved overall survival following resection. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 periampullary trial, an open-label, phase 3, randomized controlled trial (July 2000-May 2008) in 100 centers in Europe, Australia, Japan, and Canada. Of the 428 patients included in the primary analysis, 297 had ampullary, 96 had bile duct, and 35 had other cancers. INTERVENTIONS: One hundred forty-four patients were assigned to the observation group, 143 patients to receive 20 mg/m2 of folinic acid via intravenous bolus injection followed by 425 mg/m2 of fluorouracil via intravenous bolus injection administered 1 to 5 days every 28 days, and 141 patients to receive 1000 mg/m2 of intravenous infusion of gemcitabine once a week for 3 of every 4 weeks for 6 months. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was overall survival with chemotherapy vs no chemotherapy; secondary measures were chemotherapy type, toxic effects, progression-free survival, and quality of life. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients (61%) in the observation group, 83 (58%) in the fluorouracil plus folinic acid group, and 73 (52%) in the gemcitabine group died. In the observation group, the median survival was 35.2 months (95%% CI, 27.2-43.0 months) and was 43.1 (95%, CI, 34.0-56.0) in the 2 chemotherapy groups (hazard ratio, 0.86; (95% CI, 0.66-1.11; χ2 = 1.33; P = .25). After adjusting for independent prognostic variables of age, bile duct cancer, poor tumor differentiation, and positive lymph nodes and after conducting multiple regression analysis, the hazard ratio for chemotherapy compared with observation was 0.75 (95% CI, 0.57-0.98; Wald χ2 = 4.53, P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resected periampullary adenocarcinoma, adjuvant chemotherapy, compared with observation, was not associated with a significant survival benefit in the primary analysis; however, multivariable analysis adjusting for prognostic variables demonstrated a statistically significant survival benefit associated with adjuvant chemotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00058201.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/tratamiento farmacológico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias del Conducto Colédoco/tratamiento farmacológico , Espera Vigilante , Adenocarcinoma/cirugía , Anciano , Ampolla Hepatopancreática , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Neoplasias del Conducto Colédoco/cirugía , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pronóstico , Análisis de Supervivencia , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
Caveolin-1 (CAV1) is expressed in several solid tumors both in cancerous cells as well as in tumor stroma and is reported to be related to cancer progression, metastasis, therapy resistance and clinical outcomes. Many studies report contrasting functions of this protein depending on the tumor cell model, the tumor type, or the stage of cancer studied. This protein is reported to function both as tumor suppressor and as tumor promoter. In this review, we aim to summarize translational and clinical studies that provide evidence of the role of CAV1 in tumor progression and survival outcome focusing on tumors of the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. Towards this aim, a detailed search has been performed for studies on the expression and the role of CAV1 in oesophageal, gastric, colorectal, pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma prognosis. We also review and discuss the implication of CAV1 in the outcome of pharmacological interventions. We conclude that CAV1 has the potential to become an important prognostic, and possibly predictive, biomarker in GI malignancies. It may also become a novel target towards the development of improved cancer therapies. However, it is obvious that there remains a lack of consensus on important issues such as the methodologies and cut-off levels in caveolin assessment. This ultimately result in many studies being contradictory not only in terms of the role of CAV1 as a tumor-promoting or suppressing gene but also in terms of the tumor compartment in which the levels of this protein may be of clinical significance. Addressing these important technical issues, in conjunction with a further elucidation of the role of CAV1 in tumor formation and progression, will delineate the importance of CAV1 in prognostic and therapeutic perspectives.
Asunto(s)
Caveolina 1 , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales , Caveolina 1/genética , Caveolina 1/metabolismo , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/genética , Humanos , PronósticoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Management of pancreaticobiliary (PB) malignancies remains a clinical challenge. In this review, we focus on the management of oncological emergencies in PB malignancies and the potential complication of associated therapeutic interventions. METHODS: Biobliographic review of current evidence on the management of oncological emergencies, their potential complications, as well as synthesis of recommendations was performed. The pathogenesis, frequency, related symptoms as well as appropriate investigations are presented. RESULTS: The oncologic emergencies in PB patients were summarised in six categories: (1) hematological (including febrile neutropaenia, thrombocytopenia, coagulopathies), (2) gastrointestinal (gastric outlet and biliary obstruction, gastrointestinal bleeding), (3) thromboembolic events, (4) ascites, (5) metabolic disorders and (6) neurologic complications. The pathogenesis, frequency, related symptoms as well as appropriate investigations are also presented. CONCLUSION: Patients with PB malignancies are at increased risk of a wide variation of medical emergencies. Clinical knowledge, early recognition and collaboration with the relevant specialties are critical to manage these complications effectively, tailoring overall management around the actual prognosis and individuals' expectations.
Asunto(s)
Urgencias Médicas , Neoplasias , Humanos , Oncología Médica , Neoplasias/terapia , Pronóstico , Servicio de Urgencia en HospitalRESUMEN
Improving the chances of curing patients with cancer who have had surgery to remove metastatic sites of disease is a priority area for cancer research. Pexa-Vec (Pexastimogene Devacirepvec; JX-594, TG6006) is a principally immunotherapeutic oncolytic virus that has reached late-phase clinical trials. We report the results of a single-center, nonrandomized biological end point study (trial registration: EudraCT number 2012-000704-15), which builds on the success of the presurgical intravenous delivery of oncolytic viruses to tumors. Nine patients with either colorectal cancer liver metastases or metastatic melanoma were treated with a single intravenous infusion of Pexa-Vec ahead of planned surgical resection of the metastases. Grade 3 and 4 Pexa-Vec-associated side effects were lymphopaenia and neutropaenia. Pexa-Vec was peripherally carried in plasma and was not associated with peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Upon surgical resection, Pexa-Vec was found in the majority of analyzed tumors. Pexa-Vec therapy associated with IFNα secretion, chemokine induction, and resulted in transient innate and long-lived adaptive anticancer immunity. In the 2 patients with significant and complete tumor necrosis, a reduction in the peripheral T-cell receptor diversity was observed at the time of surgery. These results support the development of presurgical oncolytic vaccinia virus-based therapies to stimulate anticancer immunity and increase the chances to cure patients with cancer.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Hepáticas , Viroterapia Oncolítica , Virus Oncolíticos , Humanos , Leucocitos Mononucleares , Neoplasias Hepáticas/terapia , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Viroterapia Oncolítica/métodos , Virus Oncolíticos/genética , Virus Vaccinia/genéticaRESUMEN
Gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based treatments can be selected for pancreatic cancer. Equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (hENT1) predicts adjuvant gemcitabine treatment benefit over 5-FU. Cytidine deaminase (CDA), inside or outside of the cancer cell, will deaminate gemcitabine, altering transporter affinity. ESPAC-3(v2) was a pancreatic cancer trial comparing adjuvant gemcitabine and 5-FU. Tissue microarray sections underwent in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. Analysis of both CDA and hENT1 was possible with 277 patients. The transcript did not correlate with protein levels for either marker. High hENT1 protein was prognostic with gemcitabine; median overall survival was 26.0 v 16.8 months (p = 0.006). Low CDA transcript was prognostic regardless of arm; 24.8 v 21.2 months with gemcitabine (p = 0.02) and 26.4 v 14.6 months with 5-FU (p = 0.02). Patients with low hENT1 protein did better with 5-FU, but only if the CDA transcript was low (median survival of 5-FU v gemcitabine; 29.3 v 18.3 months, compared with 14.2 v 14.6 with high CDA). CDA mRNA is an independent prognostic biomarker. When added to hENT1 protein status, it may also provide treatment-specific predictive information and, within the frame of a personalized treatment strategy, guide to either gemcitabine or 5FU for the individual patient.