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.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
89 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic carcinoma is poor. Studies by Mayo Clinic and the Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group (GITSG) have established combined modality treatment with chemotherapy and radiation as the standard of care. Use of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy alone has also been shown to provide a benefit, but 5‑year overall survival still remains less than 5%. Conventional radiotherapy is traditionally delivered over a six week period and high toxicity is seen with the concomitant use of chemotherapy. In contrast, SBRT can be delivered in 3-5 days and, when used as a component of combined modality therapy with gemcitabine, disruption to the timely delivery of chemotherapy is minimal. Early single-institution reports of SBRT for unresectable pancreatic carcinoma demonstrate excellent local control with acceptable toxicity. Use of SBRT in unresectable pancreatic carcinoma warrants further investigation in order to improve the survival of patients with historically poor outcomes.
    Cancers. 09/2010; 2(3):1565-1575.
  • [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; · 2.83 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper deals with the formulation, calibration, and validation of the Lattice Discrete Particle Model (LDPM) suitable for the simulation of the failure behavior of concrete. LDPM simulates concrete at the meso-scale considered to be the length scale of coarse aggregate pieces. LDPM is formulated in the framework of discrete models for which the unknown displacement field is not continuous but only defined at a finite number of points representing the center of aggregate particles. Size and distribution of the particles are obtained according to the actual aggregate size distribution of concrete. Discrete compatibility and equilibrium equations are used to formulate the governing equations of the LDPM computational framework. Particle contact behavior represents the mechanical interaction among adjacent aggregate particles through the embedding mortar. Such interaction is governed by meso-scale constitutive equations simulating meso-scale tensile fracturing with strain-softening, cohesive and frictional shearing, and nonlinear compressive behavior with strain-hardening. The present, Part I, of this two-part study deals with model formulation leaving model calibration and validation to the subsequent Part II.
    Cement and Concrete Composites 10/2011; 33(9):881-890. · 2.76 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
49 Downloads
Available from
Jun 3, 2014