Head-to-head comparison of treatment sequences in advanced pancreatic cancer-Real-world data from the prospective German TPK clinical cohort study.

There are no clear guidelines regarding the optimal treatment sequence for advanced pancreatic cancer, as head-to-head phase III randomised trials are missing. We assess real-world effectiveness of three common sequential treatment strategies by emulating a hypothetical randomised trial. This analysis included 1551 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from the prospective, clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Pancreatic Cancer receiving FOLFIRINOX (n = 613) or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GEMNAB; n = 938) as palliative first-line treatment. We used marginal structural modelling to compare overall survival (OS) and time to deterioration (TTD) of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) between three common first- to second-line treatment sequences, adjusting for time-varying potential confounding. The sequences were: FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB, GEMNAB→FOLFOX/OFF and GEMNAB→nanoliposomal irinotecan (NALIRI) + 5-fluorouracil. Outcome was also calculated stratified by patients' prognostic risk according to the Pancreatic Cancer Score. Median OS and TTD of HRQoL independent of risk were 10.7 [8.9, 11.9] and 6.4 [4.8, 7.7] months for FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB, 8.4 [7.4, 9.7] and 5.8 [4.6, 7.1] months for GEMNAB→FOLFOX/OFF and 8.9 [7.8, 10.4] and 4.6 [4.1, 6.1] months for GEMNAB→NALIRI+5-fluorouracil. Compared to FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB, OS and TTD were worse for poor-risk patients with GEMNAB→FOLFOX/OFF (OS: HR 2.09 [1.47, 2.98]; TTD: HR 1.97 [1.19, 3.27]) and those with GEMNAB→NALIRI+5-fluorouracil (OS: HR 1.35, [0.76, 2.39]; TTD: HR 2.62 [1.56, 4.42]). Brackets denote 95%-confidence intervals. The estimated real-world effectiveness of the three treatment sequences evaluated were largely comparable. Poor-risk patients might benefit from intensified treatment with FOLFIRINOX→GEMNAB in terms of clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Future randomised trials on sequential treatments in advanced pancreatic cancer are warranted.

Randomized phase 2 study of valproic acid combined with simvastatin and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel-based regimens in untreated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients: the VESPA trial study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) patients have very poor prognosis highlighting the urgent need of novel treatments. In this regard, repurposing non-oncology already-approved drugs might be an attractive strategy to offer more-effective treatment easily tested in clinical trials. Accumulating evidence suggests that epigenetic deregulation is a hallmark of cancer contributing to treatment resistance in several solid tumors, including PDAC. Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) are epigenetic drugs we have investigated preclinically and clinically as anticancer agents. Valproic acid (VPA) is a generic low-cost anticonvulsant and mood stabilizer with HDAC inhibitory activity, and anticancer properties also demonstrated in PDAC models. Statins use was reported to be associated with lower mortality risk in patients with pancreatic cancer and statins have been shown to have a direct antitumor effect when used alone or in combination therapy. We recently showed capability of VPA/Simvastatin (SIM) combination to potentiate the antitumor activity of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in vitro and in vivo PDAC preclinical models. METHODS/DESIGN: VESPA is a patient-centric open label randomized multicenter phase-II investigator-initiated trial, evaluating the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of VPA/SIM plus first line gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel-based regimens (AG or PAXG) (experimental arm) versus chemotherapy alone (standard arm) in mPDAC patients. The study involves Italian and Spanish oncology centers and includes an initial 6-patients safety run-in-phase. A sample size of 240 patients (120 for each arm) was calculated under the hypothesis that the addition of VPA/SIM to gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel-based regimens may extend progression free survival from 6 to 9 months in the experimental arm. Secondary endpoints are overall survival, response rate, disease control rate, duration of response, CA 19.9 reduction, toxicity, and quality of life. The study includes a patient engagement plan and complementary biomarkers studies on tumor and blood samples. CONCLUSIONS: VESPA is the first trial evaluating efficacy and safety of two repurposed drugs in oncology such as VPA and SIM, in combination with standard chemotherapy, with the aim of improving mPDAC survival. The study is ongoing. Enrollment started in June 2023 and a total of 63 patients have been enrolled as of June 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT number: 2022-004154-63; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT05821556, posted 2023/04/20.

FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A novel validated prognostic score to facilitate treatment decision-making in real-world.

There is no prospective, randomised head-to-head trial comparing first-line FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic cancer. We assess real-world effectiveness and quality of life (QoL) of both regimens using a new prognostic score. This analysis includes 1540 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer from the prospective, clinical cohort study Tumour Registry Pancreatic Cancer separated into learning (n = 1027) and validation sample (n = 513). The Pancreatic Cancer Score (PCS) was developed using multivariate Cox regression. We compared overall survival (OS) and time to deterioration (TTD) for longitudinal QoL between first-line FOLFIRINOX (n = 407) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (n = 655) according to patients' prognostic risk, after inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) by propensity score analysis. The PCS includes nine independent prognostic factors for survival: female sex, BMI ≥24/unknown, ECOG performance status ≥1, Charlson comorbidity index ≥1, tumour staging IV/unknown at primary diagnosis, liver metastases, bilirubin >1.5× upper limit of normal (ULN), leukocytes >ULN and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio ≥4. Median OS of the validation sample was 11.4 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-14.4), 8.5 (95% CI: 6.8-9.6) and 5.9 months (95% CI: 4.0-7.4) for favourable- (0-3 risk factors), intermediate- (4-5 factors) and poor-risk group (6-9 factors), respectively. After IPTW, only poor-risk patients had significantly longer median OS and TTD of overall QoL with FOLFIRINOX (OS: 6.9 months, 95% CI: 3.9-13.3; TTD: 10.6 months, 95% CI: 2.0-14.1) vs gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (OS: 4.0 months, 95% CI: 2.8-4.8; TTD: 4.1 months, 95% CI: 2.4-4.5). Our novel PCS may facilitate treatment decisions in clinical routine of advanced pancreatic cancer, since only poor-risk, but not favourable-risk patients, seem to benefit from intensified treatment with FOLFIRINOX.

Modified FOLFIRINOX compared to Gemcitabine & nab-Paclitaxel in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - results of a match-pair analysis.

Background & objectives: FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GN) are the most commonly used regimens in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). As there is limited data on comparison of these two regimens, the present study was aimed to compare survivals and tolerance for both regimens through a match-pair analysis. Methods: The data of 350 patients with metastatic and locally advanced PDAC, treated between January 2013 and December 2019, were retrieved. A 1:1 matching, using age and performance status, without replacement was performed by using nearest neighbour matching method. Results: A total of 260 patients (130 modified FOLFIRINOX and 130 GN) were matched. The median overall survival (OS) was 12.98 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.257-8.776 months] in modifications of FOLFIRINOX (mFOLFIRINOX) cohort and 12.06 months (95% CI 6.690-8.88 months) in GN group (P=0.080). The incidence of grade 3 and 4 infections, diarrhoea, oral mucositis, and fatigue was higher with mFOLFIRINOX. Patients who received second line therapy had improved OS as compared to those who did not (14.06 vs. 9.07 months, P<0.001). Interpretation & conclusions: GN and mFOLFIRINOX appear to have similar survival outcomes in an unselected match paired patient population with advanced PDAC. A markedly increased incidence of non-myelosuppressive grade 3 and grade 4 side-effects and lack of survival improvements suggest a need for nuanced use of the mFOLFIRINOX regimen. Administration of second-line chemotherapy improves OS in patients with advanced PDAC.

PIONEER-Panc: a platform trial for phase II randomized investigations of new and emerging therapies for localized pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Personalized and effective treatments for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continue to remain elusive. Novel clinical trial designs that enable continual and rapid evaluation of novel therapeutics are needed. Here, we describe a platform clinical trial to address this unmet need. METHODS: This is a phase II study using a Bayesian platform design to evaluate multiple experimental arms against a control arm in patients with PDAC. We first separate patients into three clinical stage groups of localized PDAC (resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced disease), and further divide each stage group based on treatment history (treatment naïve or previously treated). The clinical stage and treatment history therefore define 6 different cohorts, and each cohort has one control arm but may have one or more experimental arms running simultaneously. Within each cohort, adaptive randomization rules are applied and patients will be randomized to either an experimental arm or the control arm accordingly. The experimental arm(s) of each cohort are only compared to the applicable cohort specific control arm. Experimental arms may be added independently to one or more cohorts during the study. Multiple correlative studies for tissue, blood, and imaging are also incorporated. DISCUSSION: To date, PDAC has been treated as a single disease, despite knowledge that there is substantial heterogeneity in disease presentation and biology. It is recognized that the current approach of single arm phase II trials and traditional phase III randomized studies are not well-suited for more personalized treatment strategies in PDAC. The PIONEER Panc platform clinical trial is designed to overcome these challenges and help advance our treatment strategies for this deadly disease. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study is approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) of MD Anderson Cancer Center, IRB-approved protocol 2020-0075. The PIONEER trial is registered at the US National Institutes of Health (ClinicalTrials.gov) NCT04481204 .

Use and outcomes of chemotherapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer in Australia.

BACKGROUND: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) is highly lethal. Combination chemotherapy regimens improve overall survival (OS). Historically, only one-third of mPDAC patients in Victoria received chemotherapy. AIM: To describe current Australian chemotherapy utilisation and outcomes in patients with mPDAC using the multi-site PURPLE (Pancreatic cancer: Understanding Routine Practice and Lifting End Results) registry. METHODS: PURPLE collects longitudinal data on consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer seen since January 2016. Data were collated for patients with mPDAC from six Victorian sites, and analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Three hundred and sixty-three patients with mPDAC were identified. Median age was 70 years (range 20-94 years). First-line chemotherapy was administered in 195 (54%) patients. Prevalent regimens included gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel (71%), gemcitabine alone (10%) and FOLFIRINOX (6%). Sixty-two of 195 (32%) patients who received first line treatment have proceeded to second-line chemotherapy. Chemotherapy-treated patients were younger (69 versus 73 years; P < 0.01), with better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (ECOG 0-1 89 vs 66%; P < 0.01) and lower median Charlson comorbidity index (3 vs 4; P < 0.01) compared with untreated patients. Median OS of the entire cohort from diagnosis of metastases was 5.1 months. Median OS was 9.3 months in the chemotherapy treated patients, and 2.5 months in chemotherapy-untreated patients (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of patients with mPDAC still do not receive active treatment, which may in part by explained by age, poor performance status and comorbidity. Gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel was the preferred first-line chemotherapy regimen. Median OS for treated patients in this cohort was comparable to that of recent published clinical trials.

Overall survival of patients with recurrent pancreatic cancer treated with systemic therapy: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Only a few patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) recurring after curative resection and peri-operative (neoadjuvant and adjuvant) therapy are included in clinical trials of metastatic PDAC. As such, there is a paucity of data to guide treatment after relapse, and patients are treated similarly to those with de novo metastatic PDAC (mPDAC). We evaluated the patterns of chemotherapy use and over-all survival (OS) in patients with recurrent PDAC (rPDAC) following curative therapy. METHODS: In this retrospective study, the Indiana University pancreatic cancer database was used to identify patients with PDAC who underwent curative resection and subsequently developed recurrence. Demographics, tumor and treatment characteristics were collected. Patients were broadly divided into those who received chemotherapy for rPDAC and those who did not. Patients in the former category were further subdivided into those who received single agent therapy, any standard combination therapy (5-fluorouracil/irinotecan/oxaliplatin combination or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) and those who received non-standard combinations. Survival analysis was performed by the Kaplan-Meier method. Log rank tests were used to determine differences in survival between treated rPDAC patients and those not treated. Cox regression analysis was employed to evaluate factors associated with OS. RESULTS: We identified 435 patients with resected PDAC treated between 2008 and 2014. Two hundred and twenty-three patients (51.2%) were diagnosed with rPDAC. Of these, 140 patients (63%) received chemotherapy whereas 71 patients (32%) did not receive chemotherapy. The 74 patients (53%) who received any standard, approved multiagent combination regimen had a median OS of 14 months compared to 8 months for the 47 patents (34%) who received other non-standard combinations and the 19 (13%) who received single agent therapy (P = 0.029). Multivariate cox regression analysis showed that margin negative resection, peri-operative therapy, radiotherapy and the use of any chemotherapy for rPDAC were associated with improved OS. CONCLUSION: Our findings support the use of standard approved multi-agent therapy in rPDAC. Patients derive significant benefit from these standard combination therapies with median OS that is comparable to what is observed with treatment for de novo mPDAC.

Plasma Metabolomics Predicts Chemotherapy Response in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer.

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the deadliest cancers. Developing biomarkers for chemotherapeutic response prediction is crucial for improving the dismal prognosis of advanced-PC patients (pts). To evaluate the potential of plasma metabolites as predictors of the response to chemotherapy for PC patients, we analyzed plasma metabolites using high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry from 31 cachectic, advanced-PC subjects enrolled into the PANCAX-1 (NCT02400398) prospective trial to receive a jejunal tube peptide-based diet for 12 weeks and who were planned for palliative chemotherapy. Overall, there were statistically significant differences in the levels of intermediates of multiple metabolic pathways in pts with a partial response (PR)/stable disease (SD) vs. progressive disease (PD) to chemotherapy. When stratified by the chemotherapy regimen, PD after 5-fluorouracil-based chemotherapy (e.g., FOLFIRINOX) was associated with decreased levels of amino acids (AAs). For gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (e.g., gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel), PD was associated with increased levels of intermediates of glycolysis, the TCA cycle, nucleoside synthesis, and bile acid metabolism. These results demonstrate the feasibility of plasma metabolomics in a prospective cohort of advanced-PC patients for assessing the effect of enteral feeding as their primary source of nutrition. Metabolic signatures unique to FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel may be predictive of a patient's response and warrant further study.

Clinical Outcome and Treatment Sequences of Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Treated with Contemporary Chemotherapy Protocols.

INTRODUCTION: Systemic therapy is firmly established in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Clinical efficacy is still modest and options are limited. Combination therapy protocols such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Gem/NP) define standard-of-care. Patients may receive a sequence of both regimens as first- and second-line palliative treatment. However, there is no guidance regarding a preferred order. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of clinical characteristics, treatment trajectories, and outcomes of patients with advanced PDAC treated at the West German Cancer Center Essen from 2014 to 2020 to inform treatment decisions with respect to predictive factors, impact of chemotherapy regimen sequence, and maintenance treatment. RESULTS: We identified 170 patients with available follow-up. Of those, 160 (94.1%) patients received palliative CTX for primary metastatic, locally advanced, or recurrent PDAC. Median progression-free survival (PFS) upon first palliative chemotherapy was 4.1 (3.1-5.9) months. First-line FOLFIRINOX was associated with superior PFS (median 6.3 months) and OS (9.7 months, HR 0.7, p = 0.03) as compared to Gem/NP or other regimens (PFS 3.0, OS 6.9 months). However, OS benefit of first-line FOLFIRINOX was lost in patients who received at least two treatment lines (median OS 12.1 vs. 13.1 months, p = 0.43). A landmark analysis of patients with clinical benefit (defined as CR/PR/SD for at least 20 weeks) upon first-line therapy revealed improved OS (HR 0.53, p = 0.02) for patients receiving continued deescalated maintenance therapy. Second-line regimens resulted in similar PFS (overall log-rank p = 0.92, median PFS upon second-line therapy 2.3 [1.8-2.9], per-regimen median between 1.8 and 3.9 months). A previously established systemic inflammation score proved to be strongly prognostic and allowed identification of a patient subgroup with dismal prognosis (OS 2.9 vs. 11.4 months, HR 5.23, p < 0.001), independent of other prognostic factors and with no relevant interaction with the choice of first-line regimen. CONCLUSION: In this real-world population of PDAC patients treated with contemporary combination chemotherapies, a positive impact of first-line FOLFIRINOX was only observed when no second or further line treatment was administered. Intensity-reduced maintenance therapy may lead to superior survival.

Prognosticators for Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Who Received Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel Therapy and Pancreatectomy.

Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GemNP) therapies are increasingly used to treat patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, limited data are available on their clinicopathologic prognosticators. We examined the clinicopathologic factors and survival of 213 PDAC patients who received FOLFIRINOX with 71 patients who received GemNP. The FOLFIRINOX group was younger (p < 0.01) and had a higher rate of radiation (p = 0.049), higher rate of borderline resectable and locally advanced disease (p < 0.001), higher rate of Group 1 response (p = 0.045) and lower ypN stage (p = 0.03) than the GemNP group. Within FOLFIRINOX group, radiation was associated with decreased lymph node metastasis (p = 0.01) and lower ypN stage (p = 0.01). The tumor response group, ypT, ypN, LVI and PNI, correlated significantly with both DFS and OS (p < 0.05). Patients with the ypT0/T1a/T1b tumor had better DFS (p = 0.04) and OS (p = 0.03) than those with ypT1c tumor. In multivariate analysis, the tumor response group and ypN were independently prognostic factors for DFS and OS (p < 0.05). Our study demonstrated that the FOLFIRINOX group was younger and had a better pathologic response than the GemNP group and that the tumor response group, ypN, ypT, LVI and PNI, are significant prognostic factors for survival in these patients. Our results also suggest that the tumor size of 1.0 cm is a better cut off for ypT2. Our study highlights the importance of systemic pathologic examination and the reporting of post-treatment pancreatectomies.

Analysis of EVs from patients with advanced pancreatic cancer identifies antigens and miRNAs with predictive value.

The identification of predictive factors for treatment of pancreatic cancer (PC) is an unmet clinical need. In the present work, we analyzed blood-derived extracellular vesicles (EVs) from patients with advanced PC in order to find a molecular signature predictive of response to therapy. We analyzed samples from 21 patients with advanced PC, all receiving first-line treatment with gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel. Isolated EVs have been analyzed, and the results of laboratory have been matched with clinical data in order to investigate possible predictive factors. EV concentration and size were similar between responder and non-responder patients. Analysis of 37 EV surface epitopes showed a decreased expression of SSEA4 and CD81 in responder patients. We detected more than 450 expressed miRNAs in EVs. A comparative survey between responder and non-responder patients showed that at least 44 miRNAs were differently expressed. Some of these miRNAs have already been observed in relation to the survival and gemcitabine sensitivity of tumor cells. In conclusion, we showed the ability of our approach to identify EV-derived biomarkers with predictive value for therapy response in PC. Our findings are worthy of further investigation, including the analysis of samples from patients treated with different schedules and in different settings.

Sequence Therapy with FOLFIRINOX and Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Monocentre Retrospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: While irresectable pancreatic cancer has still a dismal overall prognosis, evidence about the optimal chemotherapy sequence is scarce. After treatment with FOLFIRINOX in first-line, gemcitabine monotherapy was established for years. As a potential treatment alternative after failure of FOLFIRINOX therapy, combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel is used. However, this combination has formally not yet been approved for second-line treatment and investigation of efficiency and treatment tolerance is the aim of this trial. METHODS: Therefore, we investigated 225 patients with histologically confirmed local advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer in this retrospective monocentre study (November 2010 - July 2019). Of this, 44 patients received FOLFIRINOX therapy and outcome was further analysed. The primary end point of this cohort was overall survival (OS), and secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate, and safety. RESULTS: In most of the patients, FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment of irresectable pancreatic cancer resulted in temporary cancer control (partial response [PR]: 50% and stable disease [SD]: 18%), whereas tumour progression was observed in 23% of the patients. The median PFS time for FOLFIRINOX treatment was 7.3 months and median OS 10.3 months. Seven (16%) patients received additional local radio chemotherapy of the pancreatic tumour. During first-line therapy, in 8 (18%) patients, laparotomy was performed to proof resectability of the tumour. Hereby, in 3 patients R0- and in 3 patients R1 resection was achieved, whereas 2 patients stayed irresectable. Twenty-five of the 44 patients (57%) received second-line therapy, namely, 24 patients gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel and 1 patient gemcitabine and erlotinib. Hereby, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel led again to temporary tumour control in 46% of the patients (PR: 21%, SD: 25%), while in 29% of the patients, disease progression was observed. Corresponding median PFS for gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel treatment was 3.5 months. Patients who received second-line treatment with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine had a more favourable prognosis (median OS: 17 vs. 9.2 months; HR 0.32 [0.14-0.70], p < 0.001) than patients who were not eligible for second-line treatment. Moreover, in multivariate analyses association with patients' survival and tumour response to chemotherapy in both therapeutic lines and µGT concentrations below 100 IU/L in first-line FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy were observed. CONCLUSION: These real-world data suggest that gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel may be feasible after FOLFIRINOX therapy in patients with irresectable pancreatic cancer. However, prospective randomized data about the superiority to gemcitabine monotherapy are needed.

Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel versus FOLFIRINOX in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A European Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) and FOLFIRINOX (FFX) are two standard first-line therapies for metastatic pancreatic cancer (PC) but have rarely been compared, especially in patients with locally advanced PC (LAPC). METHODS: This is a retrospective European multicenter study including patients with LAPC treated with either GN or FFX as the first-line therapy between 2010 and 2019. Coprimary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), both estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: A total of 147 patients (GN: n = 60; FFX: n = 87) were included. Tumor resection rates were similar between the two groups (16.7% vs. 16.1%; p = 1), with similar R0 resection rates (88.9%). Median PFS rates were not statistically different: 9 months (95% CI: 8-13.5) vs. 12.1 months (95% CI: 10.1-14.6; p = 0.8), respectively. Median OS rates were 15.7 months (95% CI: 12.6-20.2) and 16.7 months (95% CI: 14.8-20.4; p = 0.7), respectively. Abdominal pain at the baseline (HR = 2.03, p = 0.03), tumors located in the tail of the pancreas (HR = 4.35, p = 0.01), CA19-9 > 200 UI/L (HR = 2.03, p = 0.004) and tumor resection (HR = 0.37, p = 0.007) were independent prognostic factors for PFS, similarly to OS. CA19-9 ≤ 200 UI/L (OR = 2.6, p = 0.047) was predictive of the tumor response. Consolidation chemoradiotherapy, more often used in the FFX group (11.7% vs. 50.6%; p < 0.001), was not predictive. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study did not show any difference between GN and FFX as the first-line treatment in patients with LAPC.

Gemcitabine/nab-Paclitaxel versus FOLFIRINOX for palliative first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer: A propensity score analysis.

BACKGROUND: Gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) and FOLFIRINOX are standard first-line treatment options for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC), but currently no prospective randomised head-to-head comparison between these treatments has yet been performed. METHODS: We conducted a comparative propensity score (PS) analysis of overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in a tri-centre cohort of patients with aPDAC undergoing palliative first-line treatment with either GN or FOLFIRINOX. RESULTS: In unadjusted analysis, OS and PFS were highly similar between patients treated with GN (n = 297) and FOLFIRINOX (n = 158). In detail, median, 1- and 2-year OS estimates were 10.1 months, 42% and 18% in the GN group, as compared to 11.2 months, 45% and 12% in the FOLFIRINOX group, respectively (log-rank p = 0.783). Accordingly, median (4.6 versus 4.8 months), 6-month (40% versus 43%) and 1-year (9% versus 9%) PFS estimates did not significantly differ (log-rank p = 0.717). However, patients treated with FOLFIRINOX were significantly younger, had fewer comorbidities, and a better Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status. These imbalances were accounted for by weighting the data with the PS. In PS analysis of survival outcomes, OS and PFS remained comparable between the two treatment groups. In detail, PS-weighted median, 1- and 2-year OS estimates were 10.1 months, 42% and 18% in the GN group, as compared to 10.1 months, 40% and 13% in the FOLFIRINOX group (PS-weighted log-rank p = 0.449). PS-weighted PFS estimates again did not differ (PS-weighted log-rank p = 0.329). CONCLUSION: This real-world comparative effectiveness study indicates that FOLFIRINOX and GN have similar effectiveness in the palliative first-line treatment of aPDAC.

Comparative Safety and Efficacy of Therapeutic Options in Resectable and Advanced/Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Indirect Comparison.

OBJECTIVES: FOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (gem-nab/P), and gemcitabine-capecitabine (gem-cap) demonstrated superiority over gemcitabine monotherapy for pancreatic cancer (PC). It is still unclear which chemotherapy regimen is the most optimal. This study aimed to conduct a systematic review (SR) and indirect comparison to compare safety and efficacy of FOLFIRINOX versus gem-nab/P and gem-cap in PC. METHODS: An SR was conducted in several databases from inception to November 2020. RCTs investigating resectable or advanced PC were included. Primary outcomes including overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS)/progression-free survival (PFS)/relapse-free survival (RFS), and grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were pooled using a random effects model. Indirect comparisons were done to compare FOLFIRINOX versus gem-cap and gem-nab/P. Heterogeneity was evaluated using Cochran's Q test and I2 statistics. RESULTS: Nine studies were identified involving 6,564 patients. Indirect comparisons showed FOLFIRINOX had significantly better OS (resectable: HR 0.78 [0.61-0.99]; advanced: HR 0.71 [0.60-0.85]) and RFS/DFS/PFS (resectable: HR 0.67 [0.55-0.82]; advanced: HR 0.65 [0.57-0.74]) compared to gem-cap as well as OS (resectable: HR 0.78 [0.61-1.00]; advanced: HR 0.73 [0.54-0.98]) and DFS/PFS (resectable: HR 0.66 [0.53-0.82]; advanced: HR 0.64 [0.49-0.83]) compared to gem-nab/P. FOLFIRINOX increased grade 3/4 AE risk compared to gem-cap and gem-nab/P. CONCLUSIONS: FOLFIRINOX is associated with significant survival benefits compared to gem-nab/P and gem-cap. However, it is important to consider the increased grade 3/4 AE risk associated with FOLFIRINOX.

Folfirinox versus gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: a comparative propensity score study.

BACKGROUND: Folfirinox (FFX) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) are both standard first-line treatments in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC). However, data comparing these two chemotherapeutic regimens and their sequential use remain scarce. METHODS: Data from two independent cohorts enrolling patients treated with FFX (n = 107) or GN (n = 109) were retrospectively pooled. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Progression-free survival (PFS) was the secondary endpoint. A propensity score based on age, gender, performance status (PS), and presence of liver metastases was used to make groups comparable. RESULTS: In the whole study population, OS was significantly higher in FFX (14 months; 95% CI: 10-21) than in GN groups (9 months; 95% CI: 8-12) before (p = 0.008) and after (p = 0.021) adjusting for age, number of metastatic sites, liver metastases, peritoneal carcinomatosis and CA19.9 level at baseline. PFS tends to be higher in FFX (6 months) than GN groups (5 months; p = 0.053). After matching (n = 49/group), patients were comparable for all baseline characteristics including PS. In the matched population, there was a trend toward greater OS in patients treated with FFX (HR = 0.67; p = 0.097). However, survival in each group was not solely a result of the first-line regimen. The proportion of patients who were fit for GN after FFX failure (FFX-GN sequence) was higher (46.9%) than the reverse sequence (20.4%; p = 0.01), which suggests a higher feasibility for the FFX-GN sequence. Corresponding median OS were 19 months versus 9.5 months, respectively (p = 0.094). CONCLUSION: This study shows greater OS with FFX than with GN in patients with mPC. GN after FFX failure appears more feasible than the reverse sequence.

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer (LAPC) Patients with FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine NabPaclitaxel: A Single-Center Experience and a Literature Review.

The optimal therapeutic strategy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients (LAPC) has not yet been established. Our aim is to evaluate how surgery after neoadjuvant treatment with either FOLFIRINOX (FFN) or Gemcitabine-NabPaclitaxel (GemNab) affects the clinical outcome in these patients. LAPC patients treated at our institution were retrospectively analysed to reach this goal. The group characteristics were similar: 35 patients were treated with the FOLFIRINOX regimen and 21 patients with Gemcitabine Nab-Paclitaxel. The number of patients undergoing surgery was 14 in the FFN group (40%) and six in the GemNab group (28.6%). The median Disease-Free Survival (DFS) was 77.10 weeks in the FFN group and 58.65 weeks in the Gem Nab group (p = 0.625), while the median PFS in the unresected group was 49.4 weeks in the FFN group and 30.9 in the GemNab group (p = 0.0029, 95% CI 0.138-0.862, HR 0.345). The overall survival (OS) in the resected population needs a longer follow up to be completely assessed, while the median overall survival (mOS) in the FFN group was 72.10 weeks and 53.30 weeks for the GemNab group (p = 0.06) in the unresected population. Surgery is a valuable option for LAPC patients and it is able to induce a relevant survival advantage. FOLFIRINOX and Gem-NabPaclitaxel should be offered as first options to pancreatic cancer patients in the locally advanced setting.

Pomalidomide enhanced gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel on pancreatic cancer both in vitro and in vivo.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy with gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel) is recommended for unresectable pancreatic cancer. However, the therapeutic efficacy is attenuated by the antitumor agent-induced activation of nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB). Thalidomide inhibits NF-κB activation, therefore, we hypothesized that pomalidomide, a third-generation IMiD, would also inhibit NF-κB activation and enhance the antitumor effects of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. METHODS: In vitro, we assessed NF-κB activity and apoptosis in response to pomalidomide alone, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel, or combination of pomalidomide and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in human pancreatic cancer cell lines (PANC-1 and MIA PaCa-2). In vivo, we established orthotopic model and the animals were treated with oral pomalidomide and injection of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. RESULTS: In pomalidomide and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel group, gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel-induced NF-κB activation was inhibited and apoptosis was enhanced in comparison with those in the other groups both in vitro and in vivo. Especially, this study revealed for the first time that pomalidomide enhances p53 on pancreatic cancer cells. The tumor growth in the pomalidomide and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel group was significantly slower than that in the gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel group. Moreover, pomalidomide induced G0/G1 cell cycle arrest and suppressed angiogenesis. CONCLUSIONS: Pomalidomide enhanced the antitumor effect of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel by inhibition of NF-κB activation. This combination regimen would be a novel strategy for treating pancreatic cancer.

Dilemma of first line regimens in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers, ranking fourth among cancer-related deaths. Despite all the major molecular advances and treatment breakthroughs, mainly targeted therapies, the cornerstone treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) remains cytotoxic chemotherapy. In 2016, more than 40 years after the introduction of gemcitabine in the management of mPC, the best choice for first-line treatment has not yet been fully elucidated. Two main strategies have been adopted to enhance treatment efficacy. The first strategy is based on combining non-cross resistant drugs, while the second option includes the development of newer generations of chemotherapy. More recently, two new regimens, FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GNP), have both been shown to improve overall survival in comparison with gemcitabine alone, at the cost of increased toxicity. Therefore, the best choice for first line therapy is a matter of debate. For some authors, FOLFIRINOX should be the first choice in patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score (0-1) given its lower hazard ratio. However, others do not share this opinion. In this paper, we review the main comparison points between FOLFIRINOX and GNP. We analyze the two pivotal trials to determine the similarities and differences in study design. In addition, we compare the toxicity profile of the two regimens as well as the impact on quality of life. Finally, we present studies revealing real life experiences and review the advantages and disadvantages of possible second-line therapies including their cost effectiveness.