Prediction Model for Severe Thrombocytopenia Induced by Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Combination Therapy in Patients with Urothelial Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia is often a use-limiting adverse reaction to gemcitabine and cisplatin (GC) combination chemotherapy, reducing therapeutic intensity, and, in some cases, requiring platelet transfusion. OBJECTIVE: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients with urothelial cancer at the initiation of GC combination therapy and the objective was to develop a prediction model for the incidence of severe thrombocytopenia using machine learning. METHODS: We performed receiver operating characteristic analysis to determine the cut-off values of the associated factors. Multivariate analyses were conducted to identify risk factors associated with the occurrence of severe thrombocytopenia. The prediction model was constructed from an ensemble model and gradient-boosted decision trees to estimate the risk of an outcome using the risk factors associated with the occurrence of severe thrombocytopenia. RESULTS: Of 186 patients included in this study, 46 (25%) experienced severe thrombocytopenia induced by GC therapy. Multivariate analyses revealed that platelet count ≤ 21.4 (×104/µL) [odds ratio 7.19, p < 0.01], hemoglobin ≤ 12.1 (g/dL) [odds ratio 2.41, p = 0.03], lymphocyte count ≤ 1.458 (×103/µL) [odds ratio 2.47, p = 0.02], and dose of gemcitabine ≥ 775.245 (mg/m2) [odds ratio 4.00, p < 0.01] were risk factors of severe thrombocytopenia. The performance of the prediction model using these associated factors was high (area under the curve 0.76, accuracy 0.82, precision 0.68, recall 0.50, and F-measure 0.58). CONCLUSIONS: Platelet count, hemoglobin level, lymphocyte count, and gemcitabine dose contributed to the development of a novel prediction model to identify the incidence of GC-induced severe thrombocytopenia.

Sarcopenia is associated with leukopenia in urothelial carcinoma patients who receive tislelizumab combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin therapy.

BACKGROUND: In the era of combination therapy, there has been limited research on body composition. Specific body composition, such as sarcopenia, possesses the potential to serve as a predictive biomarker for toxic effects and clinical response in patients with urothelial carcinoma (UC) undergoing tislelizumab combined with gemcitabine and cisplatin (T + GC). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 112 UC patients who received T + GC were selected at the Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University from April 2020 to January 2023. Baseline patient characteristics and detailed hematological parameters were collected using the electronic medical system and laboratory examinations. The computed tomography images of patients were analyzed to calculate psoas muscle mass index (PMI). We evaluated the association between sarcopenia (PMI < 4.5 cm2/m2 in men; PMI < 3.3 cm2/m2 in women) and both hematological toxicity and tumor response. RESULTS: Overall, of the 112 patients (65.2% male, median age 56 years), 43 (38.4%) were defined as sarcopenia. Patients with sarcopenia were notably older (p = 0.037), more likely to have hypertension (p = 0.009), and had poorer ECOG-PS (p = 0.027). Patients with sarcopenia were more likely to develop leukopenia (OR 2.969, 95% CI 1.028-8.575, p = 0.044) after receiving at least two cycles of T + GC. However, these significant differences were not observed in thrombocytopenia and anemia. There were no significant differences in the tumor response and grade 3-4 hematological toxicity between patients with sarcopenia and those without sarcopenia. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sarcopenia were more likely to develop leukopenia after receiving T + GC. There were no notable alterations observed in relation to anemia or thrombocytopenia. No significant difference was found between the sarcopenia group and non-sarcopenia group in terms of tumor response and grade 3-4 hematological toxicity.

First-line sintilimab with pegaspargase, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin in advanced extranodal natural killer/T cell lymphoma (SPIRIT): a multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitor sintilimab is effective in relapsed and refractory extranodal natural killer/T cell lymphoma (ENKTL), nasal type. We aimed to assess the safety and activity of sintilimab plus P-GEMOX (pegaspargase, gemcitabine, and oxaliplatin) in the first-line setting for advanced ENKTL. METHODS: The multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 trial was done at three medical centres in China. Patients aged 18-75 years with treatment-naive pathologically confirmed advanced ENKTL and an with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0-2 were eligible. Patients received intravenous sintilimab (200 mg on day 1), intramuscular pegaspargase (2000 U/m2 on day 1), intravenous gemcitabine (1 g/m2 on days 1 and 8), and intravenous oxaliplatin (130 mg/m2 on day 1) every 3 weeks for six cycles, followed by intravenous sintilimab (200 mg) every 3 weeks for up to 2 years or until disease progression or unacceptable toxicities. The primary endpoint was the complete response rate in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04127227. Enrolment has been completed, and follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Nov 29, 2019, and Sept 7, 2022, 34 eligible patients were enrolled (median age 39 years [IQR 32-55]; 25 [74%] of 34 patients were male; nine [26%] were female; and all were of Asian ethnicity). At the data cutoff (July 20, 2023), the median follow-up was 21 months (IQR 13-32). The complete response rate was 85% (29 of 34 patients, 95% CI 70-94). Five patients (15%; 95% CI 7-30) attained partial response and the ORR was 100% (34 of 34 patients). 24-month PFS was 64% (95% CI 48-86), 24-month DFS was 72% (54-95), and 36-month overall survival was 76% (52-100). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (17 [50%] of 34 patients), anaemia (10 [29%] patients), and hypertriglyceridemia (10 [29%] patients). Hypothyroidism was the most frequent immune-related adverse event (18 [53%]), including grade 3 hypothyroidism in one (3%) patient that caused treatment termination. No severe adverse events occurred. There were three deaths: one due to haemophagocytic syndrome, one due to disease progression, and one due to unknown cause, which were not considered to be treatment related. INTERPRETATION: Combination of sintilimab with P-GEMOX seems to be an active and safe first-line regimen for patients with advanced ENKTL. FUNDING: National Key Research and Development Program and National Natural Science Foundation of China, Guangzhou Science and Technology Program and the Clinical Oncology Foundation of Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology.

Efficacy and Toxicity of Palliative Chemotherapy in Elderly Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the efficacy and toxicity of palliative chemotherapy in elderly patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with those in younger patients. METHODS: A total of 60 patients with locally advanced or metastatic PDAC who received FOLFIRINOX or nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine at our institution from January 2014 to December 2021 were analyzed. Patients 70 years or older were classified into an elderly group. RESULTS: The elderly group included 16 patients (26.7%). In the elderly group, nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine was used more than FOLFIRINOX compared with the young group (75.0% and 25.0% vs 34.1% and 64.9%, respectively; P = 0.008). The overall survival was not significantly different between the 2 groups (15.6 vs 13.4 months, P = 0.259). However, the elderly group showed better progression-free survival (11.4 vs 7.4 months, P = 0.034). The incidence of adverse events including neutropenia (75.0% vs 81.8%, P = 0.716), thrombocytopenia (25.0% vs 31.3%, P = 0.743), and anemia (50.0% vs 43.2%, P = 0.771) was not different between the 2 groups. Peripheral neuropathy was more common in the elderly group (18.3% vs 2.3%, P = 0.054), though not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: The efficacy and toxicity of chemotherapy in elderly patients with advanced PDAC were comparable with those in younger patients.

Durvalumab Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin in Patients with Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer: An Exploratory Analysis of Real-World Data.

BACKGROUND: The combination of gemcitabine and cisplatin (gem/cis) with the anti-PD-L1-antibody durvalumab was recently approved as first line therapy for biliary tract cancer (BTC) based on the results of the TOPAZ-1 trial. OBJECTIVE: We aim to analyse the feasibility and efficacy of the triple combination therapy in patients with BTC in a real-world setting and in correspondence with the genetic alterations of the cancer. METHODS: In this single-centre retrospective analysis, all patients with BTC and treated with durvalumab plus gem/cis from April 2022 to September 2023 were included. Survival and treatment response were investigated, within the context of the inclusion and exclusion criteria of TOPAZ-1 and in correspondence with genetic alterations of the cancer. RESULTS: In total, 35 patients, of which 51% met the inclusion criteria of the TOPAZ-1 trial, were analysed. Patients treated within TOPAZ-1 criteria did not have a significantly different median overall survival and progression free survival than the rest of the patients (10.3 versus 9.7 months and 5.3 versus 5 months, respectively). The disease control rate of patients within the TOPAZ-1 criteria was 61.1%, in comparison to 58.8% in the rest of patients. A total of 51 grade 3 and 4 adverse events were observed without significant differences in the subgroups. No specific correlating patterns of genetic alterations with survival and response were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment of advanced patients with BTC with durvalumab and gem/cis, even beyond the inclusion criteria of the TOPAZ-1 trial, shows promising safety.

Nab-Paclitaxel plus Gemcitabine and FOLFOX in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer.

Nab-Paclitaxel plus Gemcitabine and FOLFOXThis randomized, open-label, phase II trial compared nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine followed by modified FOLFOX versus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine alone for the first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Patients receiving nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine followed by modified FOLFOX-6 (oxaliplatin, leucovorin, and 5-fluorouracil) had a 12-month and 24-month overall survival of 55.3% and 22.4%, respectively, compared with 35.4% and 7.6% in the control group; there was a higher incidence of grade 3 or higher neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. No significant differences in febrile neutropenia, epistaxis or hemorrhage of grade 3 or higher in either group were reported. Two toxic deaths (2.6%) occurred in the experimental group.

A Retrospective Study of Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Refractory to Gemcitabine Monotherapy.

BACKGROUND/AIM: This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine (GEM) plus nab-paclitaxel (nab-PTX), termed GnP, which is limited, in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC) who show good tolerance to GEM monotherapy prior to being refractory to it. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with locally advanced or metastatic PC who received GEM followed by GnP between December 2014 and March 2019, regardless of the treatment line. RESULTS: A total of 14 patients who received GnP after becoming refractory to GEM were included in this study. Eight patients were included in the nab-PTX-naïve group, seven of whom were treated with GEM monotherapy as first-line chemotherapy, and one was refractory to GEM monotherapy after modified FOLFIRINOX treatment. The other six patients were included in the nab-PTX reintroduction group. In this group, all patients received GnP followed by GEM maintenance therapy to prevent adverse events, such as peripheral neuropathy and fatigue. Two patients in the nab-PTX-naïve group showed partial response and none in the reintroduction group; median progression-free survival was 7.6 and 1.4 months and median overall survival was 9.4 and 6.2 months, respectively. In the safety analysis, grade 3 anemia and peripheral neuropathy were observed in one patient in the nab-PTX reintroduction group, while the remaining adverse events were of grade 1 or 2. CONCLUSION: GnP is safe and effective even in patients with GEM-refractory PC, and GEM treatment followed by GnP can be an effective treatment option for patients with nab-PTX-naïve PC.

Safety and Efficacy of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Against Recurrent/Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Although gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) prolongs survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (R/M NPC) compared with fluorouracil plus cisplatin, no study has evaluated the efficacy and safety of GC in nonendemic regions, including Japan, yet. Therefore, we assessed the safety and efficacy of GC in Japanese patients with R/M NPC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients with R/M NPC who received GC treatment at the Aichi Cancer Center Hospital from January 2017 to March 2020. The main eligibility criteria were histologically confirmed NPC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) of 0-2, and locally recurrent disease unsuitable for local treatment or metastatic disease. The regimen was administered every 3 weeks (gemcitabine, 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8; cisplatin, 80 mg/m2 on day 1). RESULTS: Fourteen patients (median age, 58 years) were included in the study. Two patients had an ECOG PS of 2 and 11 exhibited nonkeratinizing histology. Of the eight patients with measurable lesions, one exhibited complete response and seven exhibited partial response, with an objective response rate of 75%. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 7.7 and 24.2 months, respectively. Common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included neutropenia (64%), thrombocytopenia (14%), and febrile neutropenia (14%). The median relative dose intensity of gemcitabine and cisplatin was 62% and 60%, respectively. No treatment-related deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: The GC regimen demonstrates promising activity and is tolerable in Japanese patients with R/M NPC.

The efficacy and safety of tislelizumab combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin in the treatment of postoperative patients with muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: A combination of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and chemotherapy has demonstrated excellent clinical efficacy and safety in treating a variety of cancers, including urothelial carcinoma (UC). However, its efficacy and safety in patients with muscle-invasive upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) who are undergoing radical surgery remain uncertain. The purpose of this retrospective study was to examine the effectiveness and safety of tislelizumab combined with gemcitabine plus cisplatin (TGC) as a first-line postoperative adjuvant treatment in this population. METHODS: This single-center, real-world study retrospectively analyzed the data from 71 patients with muscle-invasive UTUC who had radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) at the Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical University between November 1, 2020, and November 1, 2023. Among the 71 patients, 30 received adjuvant therapy of TGC within 90 days after RNU and 41 underwent surveillance. No patients receive preoperative neoadjuvant therapy. The TGC therapy group received adjuvant therapy every 3 weeks postoperatively until the first recurrence, first metastasis, or death due to any reason, whichever occurred first. The patients were followed up telephonically and through outpatient visits to record and evaluate their disease-free survival (DFS) and treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). RESULTS: This study assessed the DFS of 41 and 30 patients in the surveillance group and TGC therapy group, respectively. The median DFS of the surveillance group was 16.5 [95% confidence interval (CI), 14.7-18.3] months, while the median DFS of the TGC group has not yet reached [hazard ratio (HR) 0.367 (95% CI, 0.169-0.796); p = 0.008], with 21 patients still undergoing follow-up. Compared with the surveillance group, the TGC therapy group had dramatically improved DFS after RNU and reduced risk by 63.3%. Of the 30 patients receiving combination therapy, 28 experienced TRAEs; all TRAEs were consistent with the frequently reported events in the chemotherapy-alone regimens, and there were no treatment-related deaths. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that TGC therapy exhibits excellent clinical efficacy in patients undergoing radical surgery, significantly improving DFS and displaying great safety.

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.

A pilot study investigating plasma pharmacokinetics and tolerance of oral capecitabine in carcinoma-bearing dogs.

BACKGROUND: Capecitabine is an oral prodrug of the active metabolite 5-fluorouracil, which has been used effectively in human colorectal, head and neck, and mammary carcinomas. Capecitabine has several properties that make it an attractive treatment option for dogs: (i) it is relatively inexpensive, (ii) it has a short half-life in humans, allowing for rapid plasma concentration changes to be achieved with dosage adjustments, (iii) it is effective for treating carcinomas in humans, for which there are no widely-effective oral chemotherapy options in dogs, and (iv) it is thought to preferentially target cancer cells due to different expression of thymidine phosphorylase, thereby decreasing the risk of off-target side effects. However, capecitabine has not been widely explored as a chemotherapy agent for dogs. The goal of this study was to determine the plasma disposition of capecitabine in dogs following a single oral dose and to document any adverse events associated with capecitabine administration over the course of 5 weeks. RESULTS: Capecitabine was well tolerated throughout the 5-week study period when administered to 5 dogs with naturally occurring carcinomas at 750 mg/m[Formula: see text] by mouth once daily for 14 consecutive days in a 3-week cycle. No dogs withdrew from the study due to adverse events or other causes. The median AUC[Formula: see text] was 890 h[Formula: see text]ng/ml (range 750-1100 h[Formula: see text]ng/ml); however, the maximum blood concentration and time to reach that concentration of capecitabine was highly variable after a single dose. CONCLUSIONS: Capecitabine appears well-tolerated as an oral chemotherapy agent for dogs with carcinomas, although individualized dosing may be necessary, and further studies are warranted.

Spotlight on capecitabine for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic carcinoma of various origin: A retrospective study of 25 dogs.

Capecitabine, the oral prodrug of 5-fluorouracil, is indicated in people to treat various malignant epithelial cancers. In dogs, capecitabine has not been extensively evaluated. The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate toxicity and preliminary efficacy of single agent capecitabine in dogs with advanced malignant epithelial cancers of any site, for which no effective therapy existed, conventional treatment failed or was declined. Capecitabine was administered orally at 750 mg/m2 from day 1 to 14, followed by 1-week rest period, given as 3-week cycles. Safety evaluation was performed after 2 cycles, and every 2-3 cycles thereafter. Tumour response was determined every 2-3 cycles. Twenty-five dogs with hepatocellular carcinoma (n = 6), lung papillary carcinoma (n = 4), anal sac adenocarcinoma (n = 3), colic adenocarcinoma (n = 2), and other individually represented epithelial cancers (n = 10) were included. Dogs received a median of 4 cycles (range, 2-43) for a median of 84 days (range, 42-913). Toxicity occurred in 17 (68.0%) dogs; the most frequent adverse events were gastrointestinal, with the majority being self-resolving and of mild grade. Of the 22 dogs with macroscopic disease, 3 (13.6%) achieved partial remission, 16 (72.7%) were stable and 3 (13.6%) progressed; overall clinical benefit rate was 86.4%. Median progression-free interval was 93 days (95% CI 42-154; range, 1-521) and median tumour-specific survival was 273 days (95% CI 116-482; range 45-913). These findings suggest that capecitabine is an attractive option for the treatment of several types of carcinomas in dogs. Prospective studies are warranted to optimize the scheduling of capecitabine and confirm its efficacy.

Prediction of Adjuvant Gemcitabine Sensitivity in Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Using the GemPred RNA Signature: An Ancillary Study of the PRODIGE-24/CCTG PA6 Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: GemPred, a transcriptomic signature predictive of the efficacy of adjuvant gemcitabine (GEM), was developed from cell lines and organoids and validated retrospectively. The phase III PRODIGE-24/CCTG PA6 trial has demonstrated the superiority of modified folinic acid, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (mFOLFIRINOX) over GEM as adjuvant therapy in patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at the expense of higher toxicity. We evaluated the potential predictive value of GemPred in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Routine formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded surgical specimens of 350 patients were retrieved for RNA sequencing and GemPred prediction (167 in the GEM arm and 183 in the mFOLFIRINOX [mFFX] arm). Survival analyses were stratified by resection margins, lymph node status, and cancer antigen 19-9 level. RESULTS: Eighty-nine patients' tumors (25.5%) were GemPred+ and were thus predicted to be gemcitabine-sensitive. In the GEM arm, GemPred+ patients (n = 50, 30%) had a significantly longer disease-free survival (DFS) than GemPred- patients (n = 117, 70%; median 27.3 v 10.2 months, hazard ratio [HR], 0.43 [95% CI, 0.29 to 0.65]; P < .001) and cancer-specific survival (CSS; median 68.4 v 28.6 months, HR, 0.42 [95% CI, 0.27 to 0.66]; P < .001). GemPred had no prognostic value in the mFFX arm. DFS and CSS were similar in GemPred+ patients who received adjuvant GEM and mFFX (median 27.3 v 24.0 months, and 68.4 v 51.4 months, respectively). The statistical interaction between GEM and GemPred+ status was significant for DFS (P = .008) and CSS (P = .004). GemPred+ patients had significantly more adverse events of grade ≥3 in the mFFX arm (76%) compared with those in the GEM arm (40%; P = .001). CONCLUSION: This ancillary study of a phase III randomized trial demonstrates that among the quarter of patients with a GemPred-positive transcriptomic signature, survival was comparable with that of mFOLFIRINOX, whereas those receiving adjuvant gemcitabine had fewer adverse events.

A Single-Arm Phase II Study of Nab-Paclitaxel Plus Gemcitabine and Cisplatin for Locally Advanced or Metastatic Biliary Tract Cancer.

PURPOSE: Patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) have a poor survival. We aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine and cisplatin regimen in Chinese advanced BTC patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with locally advanced or metastatic BTC administrated intravenous 100 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel, 800 mg/m2 gemcitabine, and 25 mg/m2 cisplatin every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and adverse events, while exploratory endpoint was the association of biomarkers with efficacy. RESULTS: After the median follow-up of 25.0 months, the median PFS and OS of 34 enrolled patients were 7.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.4 to 13.7) and 16.4 months (95% CI, 10.9 to 23.6), respectively. The most common treatment-related adverse events at ≥ 3 grade were neutropenia (26.5%) and leukopenia (26.5%). Survival analyses demonstrated that carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) levels could monitor patients' survival outcomes. A significant increase in the number of infiltrating CD4+ cells (p=0.008) and a decrease in programmed death-1-positive (PD-1+) cells (p=0.032) were observed in the response patients. CONCLUSION: In advanced BTC patients, nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine and cisplatin regimen showed therapeutic potential. Potential prognostic factors of CEA levels, number of CD4+ cells and PD-1+ cells may help us maximize the efficacy benefit.

Efficacy of GV1001 with gemcitabine/capecitabine in previously untreated patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma having high serum eotaxin levels (KG4/2015): an open-label, randomised, Phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The TeloVac study indicated GV1001 did not improve the survival of advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the cytokine examinations suggested that high serum eotaxin levels may predict responses to GV1001. This Phase III trial assessed the efficacy of GV1001 with gemcitabine/capecitabine for eotaxin-high patients with untreated advanced PDAC. METHODS: Patients recruited from 16 hospitals received gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2, D 1, 8, and 15)/capecitabine (830 mg/m2 BID for 21 days) per month either with (GV1001 group) or without (control group) GV1001 (0.56 mg; D 1, 3, and 5, once on week 2-4, 6, then monthly thereafter) at random in a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) and secondary end points included time to progression (TTP), objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: Total 148 patients were randomly assigned to the GV1001 (n = 75) and control groups (n = 73). The GV1001 group showed improved median OS (11.3 vs. 7.5 months, P = 0.021) and TTP (7.3 vs. 4.5 months, P = 0.021) compared to the control group. Grade >3 adverse events were reported in 77.3% and 73.1% in the GV1001 and control groups (P = 0.562), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: GV1001 plus gemcitabine/capecitabine improved OS and TTP compared to gemcitabine/capecitabine alone in eotaxin-high patients with advanced PDAC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02854072.

Preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgical decision-making in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Surgical resection combined with systemic chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Upfront surgery is considered suboptimal in cases with extensive vascular involvement, which can be classified as either borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In these patients, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy is currently used as preoperative chemotherapy and is eventually combined with radiotherapy. Thus, more patients might reach 5-year overall survival. Patient selection for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and subsequent surgery is based on anatomical, biological and conditional parameters. Current guidelines and clinical practices vary considerably regarding preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, response evaluation, and indications for surgery. In this Review, we provide an overview of the clinical evidence regarding disease staging, preoperative therapy, response evaluation and surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a clinical work-up is proposed based on the available evidence and guidelines. We identify knowledge gaps and outline a proposed research agenda.

The efficacy and safety of chemotherapy with or without anti-PD-1 for the first-line treatment of advanced urothelial carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of first-line anti-PD-1 combined with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC). METHOD: Patients with advanced UC who received first-line treatment of chemotherapy (n = 51, gemcitabine/paclitaxel [albumin-bound] combined with platinum) or immunochemotherapy (n = 50, PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy) were enrolled. The efficacy and safety were analyzed between the two groups. RESULTS: This study included data from 101 patients, including 51 patients in the chemotherapy group and 50 patients in the immunochemotherapy group. The median progression-free survival of the immunochemotherapy group was significantly longer than that of the chemotherapy group (11.5 vs. 7.17 m, HR = 0.56, p = 0.009). The two groups' overall survival showed no significant difference (20.3 vs. 17.8 m, p = 0.204). The objective response rates and the disease control rates of the two groups were 38.0% versus 49.0% (p = 0.26) and 88.0% versus 80.4% (p = 0.29). The incidence of adverse reactions (AEs) in the immunochemotherapy group and chemotherapy group were 90.0% and 84.3% (p = 0.394), respectively, and the incidence of Grade III-IV AEs were 32.0% and 35.3% (p = 0.726), respectively. CONCLUSION: In the first-line treatment of patients with advanced UC, anti-PD-1 therapy combined with chemotherapy might have better efficacy than chemotherapy alone, and AEs are similar between the two groups.

[Resection of locally advanced pancreatic cancer: careful selection and shared decision making]. / Resectie van het lokaal gevorderd pancreascarcinoom.

The landscape regarding the treatment possibilities for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) has changed over the last decade. The introduction of modern multi-agent chemotherapeutic regimens (i.e., FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) has improved outcomes. A minority, but still a substantial group of patients, nowadays undergo surgical resection after induction chemotherapy, providing a chance of long-term overall survival comparable to (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer. However, selecting appropriate candidates for surgery after induction chemotherapy remains challenging, as surgery includes substantial risks which should not outweigh the potential survival benefit. Shared decision making is crucial as patients usually overestimate the value of resection. Here, we present two patients with LAPC who underwent surgical resection, but both with various work-up strategies, leading to different outcomes. These patients highlight the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to select appropriate candidates for the best treatment option, avoiding futile surgery.

Protocol of the IntenSify-Trial: An open-label phase I trial of the CYP3A inhibitor cobicistat and the cytostatics gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced stage or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to evaluate the combination's pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy.

Expression of CYP3A5 protein is a basal and acquired resistance mechanism of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cells conferring protection against the CYP3A and CYP2C8 substrate paclitaxel through metabolic degradation. Inhibition of CYP3A isozymes restores the cells sensitivity to paclitaxel. The combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel is an established regimen for the treatment of metastasized or locally advanced inoperable pancreatic cancer. Cobicistat is a CYP3A inhibitor developed for the pharmacoenhancement of protease inhibitors. The addition of cobicistat to gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel may increase the antitumor effect. We will conduct a phase I dose escalation trial with a classical 3 + 3 design to investigate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, and cobicistat. Although the doses of gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 ) and cobicistat (150 mg) are fixed, three dose levels of nab-paclitaxel (75, 100, and 125 mg/m2 ) will be explored to account for a potential PK drug interaction. After the dose escalation phase, we will set the recommended dose for expansion (RDE) and treat up to nine patients in an expansion part of the trial. The trial is registered under the following identifiers EudraCT-Nr. 2019-001439-29, drks.de: DRKS00029409, and ct.gov: NCT05494866. Overcoming resistance to paclitaxel by CYP3A5 inhibition may lead to an increased efficacy of the gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel regimen. Safety, efficacy, PK, and RDE data need to be acquired before investigating this combination in a large-scale clinical study.

Cytidine deaminase enzyme activity is a predictive biomarker in gemcitabine-treated cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine is a chemotherapeutic agent, widely used for the treatment of many types of cancer. Cytidine deaminase (CDA) enzyme plays an important role in the metabolism of gemcitabine. This study aimed to assess the power of serum CDA residual activity in predicting drug efficacy and toxicity in gemcitabine-treated cancer patients. METHODS: This prospective observational study enrolled 63 patients with different types of malignancies who received gemcitabine chemotherapy between May 2019 and January 2022. Blood samples were obtained before the initiation of chemotherapy and serum CDA residual activity was determined using a modification of the Berthelot assay. The patients were followed up for at least 12 months up to 41 months. Overall survival was recorded and treatment-related toxicities were documented according to National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria. RESULTS: Kaplan-Meier analysis showed that patients with a lower than median CDA value (≤ 8.06 U/mg protein) had a significantly longer survival compared to patients with higher CDA values (> 8.06 U/mg, P ˂ 0.005). Among several potentially involved factors, a significant association between CDA activity and overall survival was observed in univariate analysis (HR = 4.219, 95% CI 1.40-12.74, P = 0.011). On the other hand, the rate of anemia was significantly higher in low-CDA patients compared to high-CDA individuals (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that CDA activity could be a promising biomarker to predict survival and the occurrence of anemia in cancer patients treated with gemcitabine.