Article

Gemcitabine-radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer

Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
European Journal of Cancer (Impact Factor: 4.82). 07/2002; 38(9):1212-7. DOI: 10.1016/S0959-8049(02)00076-X
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A feasibility study was performed to assess the toxicity and efficacy of a combination of gemcitabine-radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). 24 patients (15 females and 9 males) with measurable LAPC were included; the median age of the patients was 63 years (range 39-74 years). The performance status ranged from 0 to 2. Gemcitabine was administered at a dose of 300 mg/m(2), concurrent with radiotherapy, three fractions of 8 Gy, on days 1, 8 and 15. When compliance allowed, gemcitabine alone was continued thereafter, at 1000 mg/m(2), weekly times 3, every 4 weeks, depending on the response and toxicity. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and response. The objective response rate was 29.2% (1 complete remission+6 partial remissions); 12 patients had stable disease. However, 2 of the radiological partial remissions were shown to be complete remissions by pathology assessment. Median duration of response was 3 months (range 1-35+months). Median time to progression was 7 months (range 2-37+months). Median survival was 10 months (range 3-37+months). Dose reduction or omission of gemcitabine was necessary in 10 patients. Non-haematological toxicity consisted of 87.5% nausea and vomiting grade I-II, diarrhoea 54%, ulceration in stomach and duodenum 37.5% (20.8% ulceration with bleeding); 1 patient developed a fistula between the duodenum and aorta, 5 months after treatment. Anaemia grade III-IV was observed in 8.3% of the patients. Neutropenia grade III-IV was observed in 8.3%, thrombocytopenia grades III-IV in 16.7%. In 1 patient who underwent resection postchemoradiation, no viable tumour cells were found. In addition, in the patient who suddenly died of a fistula between the duodenum and aorta, no viable tumour cells were detectable at autopsy. Although the toxicity of this treatment was occasionally severe, the response and survival are encouraging and warrant further studies of this combination.

Full-text

Available from: Ben J Slotman, May 24, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
113 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background We performed a randomized, non-comparative phase II study evaluating docetaxel in combination with either daily continuous (protracted IV) 5-fluorouracil or cisplatin administered weekly, concurrent to radiotherapy in the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma. Results of the docetaxel plus cisplatin regimen are reported. Methods Forty chemotherapy-naive patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma were randomly assigned to receive 5-fluorouracil and docetaxel or docetaxel 20 mg/m2 and cisplatin 20 mg/m2/week, plus concurrent radiotherapy for 6 weeks. The radiation dose to the primary tumour was 54 Gy in 30 fractions. The trial's primary endpoint was the 6-month crude non-progression rate. Results 51 patients from 7 centres were included in the docetaxel–cisplatin treatment group. Six-month non-progression rate was 39% (95% confidence interval: 26–53). Median overall survival was 9.6 months (95% confidence interval: 2.4–60.7); 6 complete and 8 partial responses were obtained. Six patients survived more than 2 years after their inclusion in the trial. Grade ≥3 toxicity was reported in 63% of patients; no treatment-related death occurred. Severe toxicities were mainly anorexia (22%), vomiting (20%) and fatigue (24%). Conclusions Despite inadequate efficacy according to the main end point, this regimen gave a satisfactory rate of objective response (27%) with tolerable toxicity.
    Digestive and Liver Disease 10/2014; 46(10). DOI:10.1016/j.dld.2014.06.006 · 2.89 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To determine the efficacy of induction gemcitabine followed by biweekly gemcitabine concurrent with radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Between March 2001 and August 2009, 90 patients with unresectable (78) or resected (12) pancreatic cancer were treated with a standard treatment policy of induction gemcitabine (seven doses of weekly gemcitabine at 1000 mg/m(2)) followed by concurrent radiotherapy (52.5 Gy) and biweekly gemcitabine (40 mg/m(2)). After induction gemcitabine, 17.8% of patients did not proceed to chemoradiotherapy, due to either disease progression, performance status deterioration or gemcitabine toxicity. Of the patients who received chemoradiotherapy, 68.9% completed the course of 52.5 Gy, whereas 79.7% received more than 45 Gy. Chemoradiotherapy was stopped early due to treatment toxicity in 22.9% of patients. On intention to treat analysis, the median overall survival was 12.7 months in the locally advanced group and 18.2 months in the resected group. On multivariate analysis for the unresectable patients, a larger gross tumour volume was a significant poor prognostic factor for overall survival and local progression-free survival. This large series confirms, in a standard practice setting, similar efficacy and tolerability of treatment as previously reported in our phase I-II study. The benefit to patients with a gross tumour volume >48 cm(3) may be limited.
    Clinical Oncology 01/2014; 26(4). DOI:10.1016/j.clon.2014.01.003 · 2.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Radiation therapy is a staple treatment for pancreatic cancer. However, owing to the intrinsic radioresistance of pancreatic cancer cells, radiation therapy often fails to increase survival of pancreatic cancer patients. Radiation impedes cancer cells by inducing DNA damage, which can activate cell cycle checkpoints. Normal cells possess both a G1 and G2 checkpoint. However, cancer cells are often defective in G1 checkpoint due to mutations/alterations in key regulators of this checkpoint. Accordingly, our results show that normal pancreatic ductal cells respond to ionizing radiation (IR) with activation of both checkpoints whereas pancreatic cancer cells respond to IR with G2/M arrest only. Overexpression/hyperactivation of Rac1 GTPase is detected in the majority of pancreatic cancers. Rac1 plays important roles in survival and Ras-mediated transformation. Here, we show that Rac1 also plays a critical role in the response of pancreatic cancer cells to IR. Inhibition of Rac1 using specific inhibitor and dominant negative Rac1 mutant not only abrogates IR-induced G2 checkpoint activation, but also increases radiosensitivity of pancreatic cancer cells through induction of apoptosis. These results implicate Rac1 signaling in the survival of pancreatic cancer cells following IR, raising the possibility that this pathway contributes to the intrinsic radioresistance of pancreatic cancer. INTRODUCTION Radiation therapy is a staple treatment for pancreatic cancer patients, especially for those with locally advanced or borderline resectable disease [1, 2]. However, for the vast majority of pancreatic cancer patients, radiation therapy still fails to significantly increase survival or improve quality of life [3]. This lack of efficacy is primarily due to the intrinsic radioresistance of pancreatic cancer cells, as only 12–40% of pancreatic tumors exhibit an objective response to radiation therapy [4–22]. Thus, there is an urgent need to develop strategies for increasing the efficacy of radiation therapy in pancreatic cancer patients. The ionizing radiation (IR) delivered by radiation therapy impedes cancer cells mainly by the production of DNA damage. In response to IR-induced DNA damage, human cells will engage several protective mechanisms that promote DNA repair and survival [23]. Among these is the activation of cell cycle checkpoints that block cell cycle progression to allow time for DNA repair [24]. Depending on the phase of the cell cycle at which the damage is sensed, cells can activate either a G1 or G2 checkpoint, to respectively block the cell cycle at the G1/S
    Oncotarget 10/2014; 1. · 6.63 Impact Factor