A randomised phase 2 trial of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine with or without capecitabine and cisplatin in locally advanced or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The current trial assessed whether the addition of cisplatin and capecitabine to the nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine backbone is feasible and active against borderline and locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHOD: Fifty-four chemo-naive patients, aged between 18 and 75 years, with a pathological diagnosis of locally advanced or borderline resectable PDAC were randomised to receive either nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, cisplatin and oral capecitabine (PAXG; arm A; N = 26) or nab-paclitaxel followed by gemcitabine (AG; arm B; N = 28). The primary end-point was the tumour resection rate. If at least four such resections were performed, the treatment was considered as active. The secondary end-points were progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours response rate, Hartman's pathologic response, carbohydrate antigen 19.9 response rate and toxicity. RESULTS: Eight patients (31%) in the PAXG arm and nine (32%) in the AG arm underwent resection. PFS at 1-year was 58% in arm A and 39% in arm B. OS at 18-month was 69% in arm A and 54% in arm B. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase II study, the addition of cisplatin and capecitabine to the AG backbone was feasible and yielded promising results in terms of disease control without detrimental impact on tolerability. The approach warrants further investigation in a phase III study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01730222.

Safety and efficacy of preoperative or postoperative chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PACT-15): a randomised, open-label, phase 2-3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma are known to metastasise early and a rationale exists for the investigation of preoperative chemotherapy in patients with resectable disease. We aimed to assess the role of combination chemotherapy in this setting in the PACT-15 trial. METHODS: We did this randomised, open-label, phase 2-3 trial in ten hospitals in Italy. We report the phase 2 part here. Patients aged 18-75 years who were previously untreated for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, with Karnofsky performance status of more than 60, and pathologically confirmed stage I-II resectable disease were enrolled. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), with a minimisation algorithm that stratified treatment allocation by centre and concentrations of carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9 ≤5 × upper limit of normal [ULN] vs >5 × ULN), to receive surgery followed by adjuvant gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks for six cycles (arm A), surgery followed by six cycles of adjuvant PEXG (cisplatin 30 mg/m2, epirubicin 30 mg/m2, and gemcitabine 800 mg/m2 on days 1 and 15 every 4 weeks and capecitabine 1250 mg/m2 on days 1-28; arm B), or three cycles of PEXG before and three cycles after surgery (arm C). Patients and investigators who gave treatments or assessed outcomes were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who were event-free at 1 year. The primary endpoint was analysed in the per-protocol population. Safety analysis was done for all patients receiving at least one dose of study treatment. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01150630. FINDINGS: Between Oct 5, 2010, and May 30, 2015, 93 patients were randomly allocated to treatment. One centre was found to be non-compliant with the protocol, and all five patients at this centre were excluded from the study. Thus, 88 patients were included in the final study population: 26 in group A, 30 in group B, and 32 in group C. In the per-protocol population, six (23%, 95% CI 7-39) of 30 patients in group A were event-free at 1 year, as were 15 (50%, 32-68) of 30 in group B and 19 (66%, 49-83) of 29 in group C. The main grade 3 toxicities were neutropenia (five [28%] of 18 in group A, eight [38%] of 21 in group B, eight [28%] of 29 in group C before surgery, and ten [48%] of 21 in group C after surgery), anaemia (one [6%] in group A, four [19%] in group B, eight [28%] in group C before surgery, and five [24%] in group C after surgery), and fatigue (one [6%] in group A, three [14%] in group B, two [7%] in group C before surgery, and one [5%] in group C after surgery). The main grade 4 toxicity reported was neutropenia (two [11%] in group A, four [19%] in group B, none in group C). Febrile neutropenia was observed in one patient (3%) before surgery in group C. No treatment-related deaths were observed. INTERPRETATION: Our results provide evidence of the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Since the trial began, the standard of care for adjuvant therapy has altered, and other chemotherapy regimens developed. Thus, we decided to not continue with the phase 3 part of the PACT-15. We are planning a phase 3 trial of this approach with different chemotherapy regimens. FUNDING: PERLAVITA ONLUS and MyEverest ONLUS.

Phase 1B trial of Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, capecitabine, and cisplatin (PAXG regimen) in patients with unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine combination significantly improved overall survival over gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A phase 1b trial was performed (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01730222) to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of nab-paclitaxel in combination with cisplatin, capecitabine, and gemcitabine at fixed dose (800, 30, and 1250 mg m(-2) every 2 weeks, respectively; PAXG regimen). METHODS: Nab-paclitaxel doses were escalated from 100 (level one) to 125 (level two) and 150 mg m(-2) (level three) every 2 weeks in cohorts of 3-6 patients with pathologically confirmed unresectable or borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. RESULTS: Between Dec 2012 and Apr 2014, 24 patients were enroled (3 at level one, 5 at level two, 16 at level three) and received 117 cycles of PAXG. No dose-limiting toxicity occurred and level three was the RP2D. At this dose, nab-paclitaxel dose-intensity was 91%. Worse per patient grade 3/4 toxicity were neutropenia 25/31%; fatigue 19%; anaemia and hand-foot syndrome 12%, nausea 6%, and febrile neutropenia 6%. A partial response (PR) was observed in 16 (67%) and stable disease (SD) in 8 patients (33%). Among 21 patients with a baseline positive positron emission tomography (PET) scan, a complete metabolic response was observed in 9 (43%), PR in 10 (48%), SD in 2. CA19-9 decreased by ⩾49% in all the 19 patients with elevated basal value. Six patients were resected after chemotherapy. Progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS-6) was 96%. CONCLUSIONS: The RP2D of nab-paclitaxel in the PAXG regimen was 150 mg m(-2) every 2 weeks. The preliminary results are promising and warrant further exploration.

(Ir)relevance of Metformin Treatment in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: An Open-Label, Randomized Phase II Trial.

PURPOSE: We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of metformin for treating patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and to identify endocrine and metabolic phenotypic features or tumor molecular markers associated with sensitivity to metformin antineoplastic action. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We designed an open-label, randomized, phase II trial to assess the efficacy of adding metformin to a standard systemic therapy with cisplatin, epirubicin, capecitabine, and gemcitabine (PEXG) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients ages 18 years or older with metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive PEXG every 4 weeks in combination or not with 2 g oral metformin daily. The primary endpoint was 6-months progression-free survival (PFS-6) in the intention-to-treat population. RESULTS: Between August 2010 and January 2014, we randomly assigned 60 patients to receive PEXG with (n = 31) or without metformin (n = 29). At the preplanned interim analysis, the study was ended for futility. PFS-6 was 52% [95% confidence interval (CI), 33-69] in the control group and 42% (95% CI, 24-59) in the metformin group (P = 0.61). Furthermore, there was no difference in disease-free survival and overall survival between groups. Despite endocrine metabolic modifications induced by metformin, there was no correlation with the outcome. Single-nucleotide polymorphism rs11212617 predicted glycemic response, but not tumor response to metformin. Gene expression on tumor tissue did not predict tumor response to metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of metformin at the dose commonly used in diabetes did not improve outcome in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with standard systemic therapy. See related commentary by Yang and Rustgi, p. 1031.

Phase II trial of salvage therapy with trabectedin in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: No standard salvage chemotherapy has been identified for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA), and there is an urgent need for active agents against this disease. This phase II trial explored the activity of trabectedin in mPA progressing after gemcitabine-based first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with gemcitabine-resistant disease received trabectedin 1.3 mg/m(2) as a 3-h intravenous continuous infusion every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity or for a maximum of 6 months. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival rate at 6 months (PFS-6). Since trabectedin modulates the production of selected inflammatory mediators, this study also aimed to identify inflammatory biomarkers predictive for response to trabectedin. RESULTS: Between February 2011 and February 2012, 25 patients received trabectedin. PFS-6 was 4%, median PFS 1.9 months (range 0.8-7.4), and median overall survival 5.2 months (range 1.1-24.3). Grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 44% of patients, febrile neutropenia and thrombocytopenia both in 12%, anemia in 8%, fatigue in 12%, and AST and ALT increase in 8 and 4%, respectively. Trabectedin was shown to modulate the production of inflammatory mediators, and at disease progression, levels of a subgroup of cytokines/chemokines were modified. Furthermore, tissue analysis identified 30 genes associated with better prognosis. CONCLUSIONS: Although it has shown some ability to modulate inflammatory process, single-agent trabectedin had no activity as salvage therapy for mPA.

Maintenance sunitinib or observation in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase II randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: New strategies to prolong disease control warrant investigation in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. This open-label, randomised, multi-centre phase II trial explored the role of maintenance sunitinib after first-line chemotherapy in this setting. METHODS: Patients with pathologic diagnosis of metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, performance status >50%, no progression after 6 months of chemotherapy were centrally randomised by an independent contract research organisation, which was also responsible for data collection and monitoring, to observation (arm A) or sunitinib at 37.5mg daily until progression or a maximum of 6 months (arm B). The primary outcome measure was the probability of being progression-free at 6 months (PFS-6) from randomisation. Assuming P0 = 10%; P1 = 30%, α .10; ß .10, the target accrual was 26 patients per arm. RESULTS: 28 per arm were randomised. One arm B patient had kidney cancer and was excluded. Sunitinib was given for a median of 91 days (7-186). Main grade 3-4 toxicity was thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and hand-foot syndrome (12%), diarrhoea 8%. In arm A versus B, PFS-6 was 3.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 0-10.6%) and 22.2% (95% CI: 6.2-38.2%; P<0.01); 2 y overall survival was 7.1% (95% CI: 0-16.8%) and 22.9% (95% CI: 5.8-40.0%; P = 0.11), stable disease 21.4% and 51.9% (P = 0.02). CONCLUSION: This is the first randomised trial on maintenance therapy in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary end-point was fulfilled and 2 y overall survival was remarkably high, suggesting that maintenance sunitinib is promising and should be further explored in this patient population.

Salvage therapy with mitomycin and ifosfamide in patients with gemcitabine-resistant metastatic pancreatic cancer: a phase II trial.

BACKGROUND: At the time of upfront treatment failure, over half of the patients with advanced pancreatic cancer are candidates for further treatment. METHODS: Patients with metastatic gemcitabine-resistant pancreatic cancer were treated with mitomycin 8 mg/m(2) on day 1, ifosfamide 2,500 mg/m(2) and mesna 3,000 mg/m(2) on days 1-3 every 28 days until progressive disease. A positive responder was defined as a patient who was progression free at 6 months from trial enrollment. According to the Fleming design, a sample size of 34 patients was estimated assuming p0 = 0.05 and p1 = 0.20. RESULTS: Between May 2006 and December 2007, 21 patients (median age 56 years; median Karnofsky performance score 80) were enrolled. One patient died before receiving any treatment. Eighteen patients interrupted chemotherapy due to progressive disease (n = 15), toxicity (n = 2) or refusal (n = 1). Grade >2 toxicity consisted of neutropenia in 80% of patients, thrombocytopenia and fatigue in 20% and anemia in 10%. Only 1 patient was progression free at 6 months (5%). One patient had a partial response (5%) and 2 patients had stable disease (10%). Median survival was 3.7 months. CONCLUSION: Based on the poor outcome observed and on the high level of grade 3-4 toxicity, the trial was prematurely stopped and the mitomycin and ifosfamide regimen was considered insufficiently active in gemcitabine-pretreated advanced pancreatic cancer.