Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma-A Critical Review of Randomised Trials.

Pancreatic cancer is rising as one of the leading causes of cancer-related death worldwide. Patients often present with advanced disease, limiting curative treatment options and therefore making management of the disease difficult. Systemic chemotherapy has been an established part of the standard treatment in patients with both locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. In contrast, the use of radiotherapy has no clear defined role in the treatment of these patients. With the evolving imaging and radiation techniques, radiation could become a plausible intervention. In this review, we give an overview over the available data regarding radiotherapy, chemoradiation, and stereotactic body radiation therapy. We performed a systematic search of Embase and the PubMed database, focusing on studies involving locally advanced pancreatic cancer (or non-resectable pancreatic cancer) and radiotherapy without any limitation for the time of publication. We included randomised controlled trials involving patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer, including radiotherapy, chemoradiation, or stereotactic body radiation therapy. The included articles represented mainly small patient groups and had a high heterogeneity regarding radiation delivery and modality. This review presents conflicting results concerning the addition of radiation and modality in the treatment regimen. Further research is needed to improve outcomes and define the role of radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer.

S-1 (Teysuno) and gemcitabine in Caucasian patients with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine has been standard of care in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PC) for almost two decades. Randomized, primarily Japanese, studies have shown promising efficacy when combined with S-1 (GemS-1); however, no data are published in Caucasian patients. We report the first study with a combination of GemS-1 in an unselected cohort of Caucasian PC patients. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we analyzed efficacy and toxicity prospectively. RESULTS: From July 2012 to July 2014, 64 patients received at least one cycle of GemS-1. 16 patients started therapy with gemcitabine and capecitabine (GemCap) but switched to GemS-1 after median 3 cycles of GemCap due to toxicity (hand-foot syndrome). 48 patients received GemS-1 as initial therapy. For the complete cohort, median age was 68 years (range 44-80); 22 patients (34%) had locally advanced PC; 42 patients (66%) had metastatic disease. Five patients had received prior adjuvant therapy with gemcitabine and 9 pts had received prior first-line therapy. The most common adverse event was fatigue (86%), however, only grade 3 in 3%. Five patients (8%) developed febrile neutropenia. Median PFS was 8.1 (95% CI 6.9-9.0) months and median OS was 11.7 (95% CI 10.7-13.1) months in the whole GemS-1 population. In the 48 patients starting with GemS-1, median PFS was 7.7 (95% CI 6.7-8.9) months and median OS was 11.5 (95% CI 9.7-12.3) months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of gemcitabine and S-1 is safe and associated with promising efficacy in a Caucasian population; however, this needs to be confirmed in prospective clinical trials.