Regional hyperthermia with cisplatin added to gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: The HEAT randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Regional hyperthermia (RHT) with cisplatin added to gemcitabine showed efficacy in gemcitabine-pre-treated patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. We conducted a randomised clinical trial to investigate RHT with cisplatin added to gemcitabine (GPH) compared with gemcitabine (G) in the adjuvant setting of resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: This randomised, multicentre, open-label trial randomly assigned patients to either GPH (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on day 1, 15 and cisplatin 25 mg/m2 with RHT on day 2, 3 and 15,16) or to G (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on day 1,8,15), four-weekly over six cycles. Disease-free survival (DFS) was the primary end-point. Secondary end-points included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: A total of 117 eligible patients (median age, 63 years) were randomly allocated to treatment (57 GPH; 60 G). With a follow-up time of 56.6 months, the median DFS was 12.7 compared to 11.2 months for GPH and G, respectively (p = 0.394). Median post-recurrence survival was significantly prolonged in the GPH-group (15.3 versus 9.8 months; p = 0.031). Median OS reached 33.2 versus 25.2 months (p = 0.099) with 5-year survival rates of 28.4% versus 18.7%. Excluding eight patients who received additional capecitabine in the G-arm (investigators choice), median OS favoured GPH (p = 0.052). Adverse events CTCAE (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) grade ≥3 occurred in 61.5% (GPH) versus 63.6% (G) of patients. Two patients in the G-group died because of treatment-related toxic effects. CONCLUSIONS: The randomised controlled Hyperthermia European Adjuvant Trial study failed to demonstrate a significant difference in DFS. However, it suggests a difference in post-recurrence survival and a trend for improved OS. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, number NCT01077427.

Metastasized pancreatic carcinoma with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX therapy and R0 resection.

Patients with metastasized carcinoma of the pancreas have a very poor prognosis, and long-term survival cannot be expected. This case report describes two patients with an initial diagnosis of metastatic pancreatic cancer, both with hepatic metastases and one with an additional peritoneal carcinomatosis. Initially, both patients were treated intravenously with the FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy regimen, consisting of 5-FU, folinic acid, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. Surprisingly, the FOLFIRINOX treatment resulted in complete resolution of the hepatic metastases in both patients, with no lesions detectable by computed tomography scan. Furthermore, treatment response included decreased diameter of the primary tumor in the tail of the pancreas and disappearance of the additional peritoneal carcinomatosis. Both patients were discussed by our multidisciplinary tumor board, which recommended surgical resections of the carcinoma. The R0 resection of the primary tumor was successful in both cases and, interestingly, the resected tissues showed no evidence of the hepatic metastases intraoperatively. In the first case, the patient received a postoperative 6-mo course of adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine. In the second case, the patient continued to receive the FOLFIRINOX regimen for an additional 6 mo postoperatively. At 12 mo after the operation, a nonresectable retroperitoneal lymph node metastasis was detected in the first patient, whereas the second patient remained in complete remission at the time of this report (5 mo after the adjuvant therapy was discontinued). This case report is the first of its kind to describe two cases of hepatic metastatic pancreatic carcinoma that were resectable following treatment with FOLFIRINOX. Further studies are required to examine the role of FOLFIRINOX as a neoadjuvant treatment option in subgroups of patients with initially metastasized pancreatic carcinoma.

Multimodal treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) represents the most common liver cancer with an increasing incidence and it accounts for the third most common cause of cancer-related death worldwide. Even though the clinical diagnosis and management of HCC improved significantly in the last decades, this malignant disease is still associated with a poor prognosis. It has to be distinguished between patients with HCCs, which developed from liver cirrhosis, and patients without underlying liver cirrhosis as classification systems, prognosis estimation and therapy recommendations differ in-between. In case of HCC in patients with liver cirrhosis in Europe, treatment allocation and prognosis estimation are mainly based on the Barcelona-Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) staging system. Based on this staging system different surgical, interventional radiological/sonographical and non-interventional procedures have been established for the multimodal treatment of HCC. The BCLC classification system represents a decision guidance; however because of its limitations in selected patients treatment allocation should be determined on an individualized rather than a guideline-based medicine by a multidisciplinary board in order to offer the best treatment option for each patient. This review summarizes the current management of HCC and illustrates controversial areas of therapeutic strategies.