A randomized phase II study of S-1 plus oral leucovorin versus S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the efficacy and toxicity of adding oral leucovorin (LV) to S-1 when compared with S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer (PC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Gemcitabine-refractory PC patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive S-1 at 40, 50, or 60 mg according to body surface area plus LV 25 mg, both given orally twice daily for 1 week, repeated every 2 weeks (SL group), or S-1 monotherapy at the same dose as the SL group for 4 weeks, repeated every 6 weeks (S-1 group). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Among 142 patients enrolled, 140 were eligible for efficacy assessment (SL: n = 69 and S-1: n = 71). PFS was significantly longer in the SL group than in the S-1 group [median PFS, 3.8 versus 2.7 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.56; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.37-0.85; P = 0.003]). The disease control rate was significantly higher in the SL group than in the S-1 group (91% versus 72%; P = 0.004). Overall survival (OS) was similar in both groups (median OS, 6.3 versus 6.1 months; HR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.54-1.22; P = 0.463). After adjusting for patient background factors in a multivariate analysis, OS tended to be better in the SL group (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.47-1.07; P = 0.099). Both treatments were well tolerated, although gastrointestinal toxicities were slightly more severe in the SL group. CONCLUSION: The addition of LV to S-1 significantly improved PFS in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced PC, and a phase III trial has been initiated in a similar setting. CLINICAL TRIALS NUMBER: Japan Pharmaceutical Information Center: JapicCTI-111554.

Randomised phase II trial of S-1 plus oxaliplatin vs S-1 in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This randomised, open-label, multicenter phase II study compared progression-free survival (PFS) of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) with that of S-1 alone in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with confirmed progressive disease following the first-line treatment with a gemcitabine-based regimen were randomised to receive either S-1 (80/100/120 mg day(-1) based on body surface area (BSA), orally, days 1-28, every 6 weeks) or SOX (S-1 80/100/120 mg day(-1) based on BSA, orally, days 1-14, plus oxaliplatin 100 mg m(-2), intravenously, day 1, every 3 weeks). The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS: Between January 2009 and July 2010, 271 patients were randomly allocated to either S-1 (n=135) or SOX (n=136). Median PFS for S-1 and SOX were 2.8 and 3.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR)=0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65-1.08; stratified log-rank test P=0.18). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.9 vs 7.4 months (HR=1.03; 95% CI, 0.79-1.34; stratified log-rank test P=0.82). The response rate (RR) was 11.5% vs 20.9% (P=0.04). The major grade 3/4 toxicities (S-1 and SOX) were neutropenia (11.4% and 8.1%), thrombocytopenia (4.5% and 10.3%) and anorexia (12.9% and 14.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Although SOX showed an advantage in RR, it provided no significant improvement in PFS or OS compared with S-1 alone.

Prognostic nomogram for nonresectable pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: A nomogram is progressively being used as a useful predictive tool for cancer prognosis. A nomogram to predict survival in nonresectable pancreatic cancer treated with chemotherapy has not been reported. METHODS: Using prospectively collected data on patients with nonresectable pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy at five Japanese hospitals, we derived a predictive nomogram and internally validated it using a concordance index and calibration plots. RESULTS: In total, 531 patients were included between June 2001 and February 2013. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) TNM stages were III and IV in 204 and 327 patients, respectively. The median survival time of the total cohort was 11.3 months. A nomogram was generated to predict survival probabilities at 6, 12, and 18 months and median survival time, based on the following six variables: age; sex; performance status; tumour size; regional lymph node metastasis; and distant metastasis. The concordance index of the present nomogram was higher than that of the AJCC TNM staging system at 12 months (0.686 vs 0.612). The calibration plots demonstrated good fitness of the nomogram for survival prediction. CONCLUSIONS: The present nomogram can provide valuable information for tailored decision-making early after the diagnosis of nonresectable pancreatic cancer.

Japanese multicenter experience of endoscopic necrosectomy for infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis: The JENIPaN study.

BACKGROUND AND STUDY AIMS: Only a few large cohort studies have evaluated the efficacy and safety of endoscopic necrosectomy for infected walled-off pancreatic necrosis (WOPN). Therefore, a multicenter, large cohort study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of endoscopic necrosectomy and to examine the procedural details and follow-up after successful endoscopic necrosectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted in 16 leading Japanese institutions for patients who underwent endoscopic necrosectomy for infected WOPN between August 2005 and July 2011. The follow-up data were also reviewed to determine the long-term outcomes of the procedures. RESULTS: Of 57 patients, 43 (75 %) experienced successful resolution after a median of 5 sessions of endoscopic necrosectomy and 21 days of treatment. Complications occurred in 19 patients (33 %) during the treatment period. Six patients died (11 %): two due to multiple organ failure and one patient each from air embolism, splenic aneurysm, hemorrhage from a Mallory - Weiss tear, and an unknown cause. Of 43 patients with successful endoscopic necrosectomy, recurrent cavity formation was observed in three patients during a median follow-up period of 27 months. CONCLUSIONS: Endoscopic necrosectomy can be an effective technique for infected WOPN and requires a relatively short treatment period. However, serious complications can arise, including death. Therefore, patients should be carefully selected, and knowledgeable, skilled, and experienced operators should perform the procedure. Further research into safer technologies is required in order to reduce the associated morbidity and mortality.

A multicentre randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine alone vs gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer: GEMSAP study.

BACKGROUND: This randomised phase II trial compared gemcitabine alone vs gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to 4-week treatment with gemcitabine alone (1000, mg m(-2) gemcitabine by 30-min infusion on days 1, 8, and 15) or gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy (1000, mg m(-2) gemcitabine by 30-min infusion on days 1 and 15 and 40 mg m(-2) S-1 orally twice daily on days 1-15). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Between July 2006 and February 2009, 106 patients were enrolled. The PFS in gemcitabine and S-1 combination arm was significantly longer than in gemcitabine arm (5.4 vs 3.6 months), with a hazard ratio of 0.64 (P=0.036). Overall survival (OS) for gemcitabine and S-1 combination was longer than that for gemcitabine monotherapy (13.5 vs 8.8 months), with a hazard ratio of 0.72 (P=0.104). Overall, grade 3 or 4 adverse events were similar in both arms. CONCLUSION: Gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy demonstrated longer PFS in advanced pancreatic cancer. Improved OS duration of 4.7 months was found for gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy, though this was not statistically significant.

Inhibition of renin-angiotensin system affects prognosis of advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine.

BACKGROUND: The renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is thought to have a role in carcinogenesis, and RAS inhibition may prevent tumour growth. METHODS: We retrospectively investigated the impact of angiotensin I-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin II type-1 receptor blockers (ARBs) in 155 patients with pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine monotherapy. Patients were divided into three groups: the ACEI/ARB group (27 patients receiving an ACEI or ARB for hypertension (HT)), the non-ACEI/ARB with HT group (25 patients receiving antihypertensive drugs other than ACEIs or ARBs), and the non-HT group (103 patients receiving no antihypertensive drugs). RESULTS: Patient characteristics were not different, except for age and HT medications. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 8.7 months in the ACEI/ARB group, 4.5 months in the non-ACEI/ARB with HT group, and 3.6 months in the non-HT group. Overall survival (OS) was 15.1 months in the ACEI/ARB group, 8.9 months in the non-ACEI/ARB with HT group, and 9.5 months in the non-HT group. The use of ACEIs/ARBs was a significant prognostic factor for both PFS (P=0.032) and OS (P=0.014) in the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The ACEIs/ARBs in combination with gemcitabine might improve clinical outcomes in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Prospective trials are needed to test this hypothesis.