JOP. J Pancreas (Online) 2012 Jul 10; 13(4):372-375.
Update on Novel Therapies for Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumors
Highlights from the “2012 ASCO Annual Meeting”. Chicago, IL, USA; May 31 - June 5, 2012
Paul Eliezer Oberstein1, Muhammad Wasif Saif2
1Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons at New York Presbyterian Hospital. New York, NY, USA. 2Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA
Summary
Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) describe a heterogeneous group of tumors with a wide range of morphologic, functional, and behavioral characteristics. Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET) are a subset of NETs which are increasing in incidence and prevalence. These tumors are generally slow growing and behave in an indolent fashion. However, when these tumors spread they can be life threatening and difficult to treat with current modalities. In 2011, the landscape of treatment for pNET was changed with the approval of two targeted agents, sunitinib and everolimus, the first new therapies for this disease in over 20 years. Data from these clinical trials and extensive preclinical work into the underlying molecular pathways in neuroendocrine tumors has generated intense interest in the quest to identify additional effective agents in this challenging disease. At the 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting, several researchers presented updated data regarding the use of targeted agents, alternative chemotherapeutic agents and combinations of these in the treatment of pNET. Corrie et al. (Abstract #4121) reported data from a chemotherapy clinical trial replacing 5-FU with capecitabine and evaluating the addition of cisplatin in NETs. Several authors reviewed the addition of the anti VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab into combination therapy. Ducreux et al (Abstract #4036) presented results from a trial of chemotherapy plus bevacizumab while Firdaus et al. (Abstract #4127) reported the results of combination therapy with octreotide, bevacizumab, and pertuzumab. Hobday et al. (Abstract #4048) reported positive results of an interim analysis of combination therapy with an mTOR inhibitor and bevacizumab. Kulke et al (Abstract #4125) reported the results of a clinical trial utilizing an antibody targeting the insulin growth factor receptor. Finally, Vinik et al. (Abstract #4118) provided updated survival data form the seminal phase III trial that led to approval of sunitinib in the treatment of pNET. The authors review and summarize these abstracts in this article.
What Did We Know Before the 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting?
Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) consist of a diverse group of tumors composed of cells showing neuroendocrine cell differentiation (secretory granules), a subset of which can be further classified by their dominant secretory products. Although it was thought that the neuroendocrine cells that give rise to NETs migrated from the neural crest to the gut endoderm, it is now apparent that enteropancreatic neuroendocrine cells originate from multipotent stem cells that give rise to all epithelial cell types in the gastrointestinal tract and pancreas [1]. NETs show heterogeneity in morphologic, functional and clinical features [2]. A subset of NETs involving the pancreas previously termed islet cell tumors or islet cell carcinomas are designated pancreatic NETs (pNETs.) Although pNET represent a small percentage of all pancreatic tumors (1.3%), the prevalence of these tumors is significant (9.9% of all pancreatic tumors) and the incidence is increasing [3]. In tertiary oncology centers, the majority of patients with malignant pNETs represent advanced stage tumors with approximately 65% of patients presenting with unresectable or metastatic disease [4].
Prior to 2011, the only approved agent for unresectable disease was streptozocin which was approved prior to 1984 after demonstrating some efficacy in early trials (either alone [5] or in combination with doxorubicin [6] or 5-FU [7]). Further studies have questioned the efficacy of streptozocin [8] and there had not been any new drugs approved in the last 20 years. As a result patients with unresectable pNETs have a poor prognosis. The median survival time for patients with distant metastatic disease is 24 months [4], the 5-year survival rate of patients with metastatic disease is 30-40% [9] and has not changed for 20 years. The effort to find improved therapeutics for pNET was bolstered by the observation that there are several inherited cancer syndromes which are associated with pNET (including multiple endocrine neoplasia type 1 (MEN1), von Hippel-Lindau disease (vHL), neurofibromatosis 1 (NF1), and the tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC)) [10]. Unfortunately the underlying genetic abnormalities in these syndromes are relevant in only a subset of the sporadic pNETs [11]. A global gene expression analysis of pNETs revealed that at least two important genes in the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway (TSC2 and PTEN) were downregulated in 85% of primary tumors [12, 13]. Additionally, aberrant expression of several tyrosine kinase receptors and overexpression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) have also been noted in pNET [13]. Utilizing this preclinical data, two targeted agents demonstrated prolongation of progression free survival in advanced pNET and were approved for this indication in 2011. In the RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors (RADIANT)-3 trial, an inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), everolimus was superior to placebo in prolonging progression free survival in patients with unresectable, advanced pNET from 4.6 to 11.0 months [14]. Another phase III trial looked at the multi-kinase inhibitor, sunitinib, in unresectable pNET and found an improvement in progression free survival from 5.5 to 11.4 months when compared to placebo [15]. Despite these impressive results in improving progression free survival, the response rate to these targeted therapies remains low. There are ongoing efforts to improve on this therapy by more potent targeting of these pathways, by combination therapy, and by identification of additional targets. One promising target is the insulin-like growth factor pathway since both the ligand (IGF) and the cognate receptor (IGF-1R) are frequently expressed in neuroendocrine tumors [16]. There is also at least one report that indicates that some patients with neuroendocrine tumors have upregulation of the HER-2 protein [17] and that this may be an additional target for therapy.
At the 2012 ASCO Annual Meeting, several abstracts were presented highlighting this novel research and reported the results of clinical trials to identify novel and improved therapy for the treatment of pNET. These reports are reviewed and summarized here.
What We Learned at the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting
Updated Chemotherapy Regimens
Chemotherapy has been used in the treatment of NET for many years; streptozocin was approved by the FDA for this indication prior to 1984. A randomized controlled trial demonstrated that addition of 5-FU to streptozocin was associated with improved response [18] and this combination has been frequently used. In many tumors, the oral prodrug capecitabine has shown similar efficacy when used as replacement for 5-FU, often with a favorable safety profile. A case series described several responses with the combination of streptozocin, capecitabine, and cisplatin [19] and this provided the rationale for a clinical trial of this combination. In Abstract #4121 [20], Corrie et al. described the results of this clinical trial. They conducted a prospective, randomized phase II trial looking at the role of combination capecitabine/streptozocin plus or minus cisplatin in advanced NETs with 48% of the patients enrolled with pNET. As summarized in Table 1 they found similar outcomes with the two treatment groups with increased toxicity in the more aggressive treatment arm (cisplatin group.) Of note, the response rate of both arms was low with partial response seen in 14% and 8% but the overall disease control rate was close to 80% with either regimen.
|
Table 1. Summary of abstracts regarding treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors presented at the 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Annual Meeting. |
|||||
|
Abstract |
Trial design |
Study population |
Intervention |
Results |
Comments |
|
Vinik, et al. |
Phase III, |
Unresectable, well differentiated pNET 171 patients |
Sunitinib |
Median overall
survival: HR=0.71; P=0.11 |
Did not reach significance 69% of placebo patients crossed over to sunitinib |
|
Corrie, et al. |
Phase II, |
Unresectable, advanced
or metastatic NET 86 patients (41 with pNET) |
Capecitabine +
streptozocin (CS) |
Partial response: 8% vs. 14% Stable disease: 74% vs. 64% mPFS: 10.2 vs. 9.7 months (All for CS vs. CSC) |
Capecitabine may be a substitute for 5-FU Response rate was lower than expected Cisplatin did not seem to add benefit |
|
Ducreux, et al. |
Phase II, |
Progressive, metastatic, well differentiated pNET 34 patients (1 group) |
5-FU + streptozocin |
Partial response: 56% (19/34) a Stable disease: 44% (15/34) a mPFS= 23.7 months a |
Grade 3 or 4 toxicity was seen in 68% a |
|
Hobday, et al. |
Phase II, |
Progressive, well or moderately differentiated pNET 25 patients (interim analysis) |
Temsirolimus |
Partial response: 52% (13/25) 6-month PFS: 84% (21/25) |
Study is ongoing Encouraging response |
|
Kulke, et al. |
Phase II, |
Metastatic, low or intermediate grade NET (50% were pNET) 60 patients (30 with pNET) |
AMG479 |
Partial response: 0% mPFS: 6.3 months |
Treatment was well tolerated but little response |
|
Firdaus, et al. |
Phase II, |
Advanced well differentiated NET (26% with pNET) 43 patients (11 with pNET) |
Bevacizumab |
Response rate: 16% (1 CR) mPFS: 8.2 months |
Median overall survival not yet reached |
|
5-FU: 5-flurouracil; CS: capecitabine + streptozocin; CSC: capecitabine + streptozocin+ cisplatin; HR: hazard ratio; IGF-1R: insulin growth factor 1 receptor; LAR: long acting release; mPFS: median progression free survival; NET: neuroendocrine tumors; PFS: progression free survival; pNET: pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors a There were two groups in the trial but data were only presented regarding one group (the one noted) |
|||||
Addition of Bevacizumab
Several abstracts looked at the role of bevacizumab in the treatment of advanced pNET. Sunitinib is thought to work at least in part by inhibition of the VEGF pathway and VEGF is overexpressed in pNET [13] leading to significant interest in incorporating the anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody bevacizumab in the treatment of this disease.
In Abstract #4036 [21], Ducreux et al. reported results from one group of a phase II trial looking at the activity of bevacizumab in combination with standard chemotherapy with 5-FU/streptozocin in patients with metastatic, progressive, well differentiated pNETs. The primary outcome was progression free-survival and at this report the median progression free survival was 23.7 months. The combination therapy was associated with a very high rate of response (19 of 34; 55.9%) but grade 3 or 4 adverse events (as measured by common toxicity criteria (CTC)) were also common, occurring in 23 of 34 patients (67.6%). This combination seems to have encouraging activity and may be further investigated in appropriate patients in a phase III setting.
In Abstract #4127 [22], Firdaus et al. reported on an ambitious phase II trials looking at a combination of targeted agents. The investigators enrolled healthy patients with advanced, well differentiated NETs (including 26% with pNET) and treated them with octreotide (Sandostatin® LAR, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Co., East Hanover, NJ, USA), bevacizumab, and pertuzumab- a monoclonal antibody that disrupts HER-2 signaling. The combination was associated with some response (as noted in Table 1) and may lead to further investigation in a controlled trial.
In Abstract #4048 [23], Hobday et al. reported the results of an interim analysis of a phase II trial looking at the combination of mTOR inhibition with temsirolimus and VEGF inhibition with bevacizumab. The combination treatment is being investigated in patients with well or moderately differentiated pNET who have progressive disease. The interim analysis was performed after enrolling 25 of the planned 50 patients and it showed a high rate of response with 13 patients (52%) demonstrating a radiographic partial response. The study is continuing accrual, further safety analysis will be important to evaluate tolerability of this regimen but the high response rate is encouraging.
Other Targeted Agents
In Abstract #4125 [24], Kulke et al. reported on a phase II trial evaluating the use of an investigational targeted therapy directed against IGF-1R. The insulin growth factor receptor is thought to play a role in progression of neuroendocrine tumors so they evaluated the role of a monoclonal antibody against IGF-1R in patients with metastatic, progression neuroendocrine tumors. Although this agent was well tolerated, there were no radiographic responses by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria. It is not known if there will eventually be a biomarker that may select a subset of patients that can benefit from this therapy but at this time is was not effective in this unselected population.
Finally, in Abstract #4118 [25], Vinik et al. reported updated results from the large phase III trial that demonstrated superiority of sunitinib compared to placebo in prolonging time to progression. At the time of the initial analysis there were few deaths (30 out of 171 or 18%), potentially limiting the survival analysis. At the time of this updated analysis, 51% of the patients have died (87 of 171) and the median overall survival is now estimated at 33.0 months in the intervention group (sunitinib) and 26.7 months in the placebo group. This result did not reach significance with a hazard ratio of 0.71 (95% CI: 0.47-1.09; P=0.11). As previously reported most patients in the placebo arm (69%) crossed over to receive sunitinib on progression limiting the ability to detect a difference in mortality due to this intervention.
Discussion
As NETs increase in incidence the spectrum of available therapy is also increasing. There has been a suggestion that some of the increased incidence in this diagnosis is due to improvements in diagnostic imaging with detection of smaller lesions in addition to the incidental diagnosis of asymptomatic cases [26]. However, for the group of advanced or malignant NET, effective treatment options will need to be identified through well designed clinical trials. Recently two targeted agents have been approved by the FDA for the treatment of progressive pNET. Everolimus is an mTOR inhibitor which inhibits cell growth, proliferation, and angiogenesis. Sunitinib is a multi-kinase inhibitor that is thought to have an effect in pNET through inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) which plays a role in angiogenesis. As summarized above, there were several abstracts presented at the 2012 ASCO Annual Meeting which represent important contributions to this field. Chemotherapy plays an important role for many patients and report by Corrie et al. [20] suggest that capecitabine is a safe combination with streptozocin; however, the response rate is low and it does not seem that cisplatin adds substantially to this regimen. Ducreux et al. [21] have demonstrated that chemotherapy and targeted therapy can be combined in the treatment of pNET with impressive efficacy, though the need to minimize toxicity is noted. Inhibition of IGF-1R does not seem to lead to response in pNET but there were promising preliminary results suggesting that combination of mTOR inhibition and VEGF blockade may add substantial benefit.
In summary, the abstracts presented at the 2012 ASCO Annual Meeting highlight the continued progress in developing novel treatments to improve outcomes in advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The continued identification of new agents that are being tested in clinical trials suggests that there is promise in the future treatment for patients suffering from this form of pancreatic malignancy.
Key words Drug Therapy; everolimus; Neuroendocrine Tumors; Pancreatic Neoplasms; sunitinib; Vascular Endothelial Growth Factors
Abbreviations NET: neuroendocrine tumors; pNET: pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors; PS: performance status.
Conflict of interest The authors have no potential conflicts of interest
Correspondence
Paul Eliezer
Oberstein
Division of Hematology/Oncology
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons
New York Presbyterian Hospital
177 Fort Washington Ave. 6GN-435
New York, NY 10032
USA
Phone: +1-212-305-9382
Fax: +1-212-305-3035
E-mail: po2178@columbia.edu
References
1. Barker N, van Es JH, Kuipers J, et al. Identification of stem cells in small intestine and colon by marker gene Lgr5. Nature 2007;449:1003-7.
2. Jensen RT. Carcinoid tumors and the carcinoid syndrome. In: De Vita VTJ, Lawrence, T., Rosenberg, S.A., ed. Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins; 2008.
3. Yao JC, Eisner MP, Leary C, et al. Population-based study of islet cell carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:3492-500.
4. Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A, et al. One hundred years after "carcinoid": epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2008;26:3063-72.
5. Broder LE, Carter SK. Pancreatic islet cell carcinoma. II. Results of therapy with streptozotocin in 52 patients. Ann Intern Med 1973;79:108-18.
6. Moertel CG, Lefkopoulo M, Lipsitz S, Hahn RG, Klaassen D. Streptozocin-doxorubicin, streptozocin-fluorouracil or chlorozotocin in the treatment of advanced islet-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1992;326:519-23.
7. Kouvaraki MA, Ajani JA, Hoff P, et al. Fluorouracil, doxorubicin, and streptozocin in the treatment of patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic endocrine carcinomas. J Clin Oncol 2004;22:4762-71.
8. McCollum AD, Kulke MH, Ryan DP, et al. Lack of efficacy of streptozocin and doxorubicin in patients with advanced pancreatic endocrine tumors. Am J Clin Oncol 2004;27:485-8.
9. Metz DC, Jensen RT. Gastrointestinal neuroendocrine tumors: pancreatic endocrine tumors. Gastroenterology 2008;135:1469-92.
10. Jensen RT, Berna MJ, Bingham DB, Norton JA. Inherited pancreatic endocrine tumor syndromes: advances in molecular pathogenesis, diagnosis, management, and controversies. Cancer 2008;113:1807-43.
11. Zikusoka MN, Kidd M, Eick G, Latich I, Modlin IM. The molecular genetics of gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Cancer 2005;104:2292-309.
12. Missiaglia E, Dalai I, Barbi S, et al. Pancreatic endocrine tumors: expression profiling evidences a role for AKT-mTOR pathway. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:245-55.
13. Zhang J, Jia Z, Li Q, et al. Elevated expression of vascular endothelial growth factor correlates with increased angiogenesis and decreased progression-free survival among patients with low-grade neuroendocrine tumors. Cancer 2007;109:1478-86.
14. Yao JC, Shah MH, Ito T, et al. Everolimus for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. N Engl J Med 2011;364:514-23.
15. Raymond E, Dahan L, Raoul JL, et al. Sunitinib malate for the treatment of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. N Engl J Med 2011;364:501-13.
16. von Wichert G, Jehle PM, Hoeflich A, et al. Insulin-like growth factor-I is an autocrine regulator of chromogranin A secretion and growth in human neuroendocrine tumor cells. Cancer Res 2000;60:4573-81.
17. Azzoni C, Bottarelli L, Cecchini S, et al. Involvement of HER-2/neu and metastasis-related proteins in the development of ileal neuroendocrine tumors. Virchows Arch 2011;458:525-36.
18. Moertel CG, Hanley JA, Johnson LA. Streptozocin alone compared with streptozocin plus fluorouracil in the treatment of advanced islet-cell carcinoma. N Engl J Med 1980;303:1189-94.
19. Turner NC, Strauss SJ, Sarker D, et al. Chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin and streptozocin for neuroendocrine tumours. Br J Cancer 2010;102:1106-12.
20. Corrie P, Caplin M, Reed N, et al. Treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumors: Results of the UKINETS and NCRI randomized phase II NET01 trial. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(Suppl):Abstract 4121.
21. Ducreux M, Seitz J-F, Smith D, et al. Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab combined with chemotherapy in the treatment of patients with metastatic well-differentiated duodeno-pancreatic endocrine tumors (BETTER study). J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(Suppl):Abstract 4036.
22. Firdaus I, Shih KC, Zakari A, et al. Bevacizumab, pertuzumab, and sandostatin for patients (pts) with advanced neuroendocrine cancers (NET). J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(Suppl):Abstract 2127.
23. Hobday TJ, Qin R, Reidy DL, et al. Multicenter phase II trial of temsirolimus (TEM) and bevacizumab (BEV) in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (PNET): Results of a planned interim efficacy analysis. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(Suppl):Abstract 4047.
24. Kulke M, Chan JA, David P. Ryan, et al. A multi-institutional phase II open-label study of AMG 479 in advanced carcinoid and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(Suppl):Abstract 4125.
25. Vinik A, Cutsem EV, Niccoli P, et al. Updated results from a phase III trial of sunitinib versus placebo in patients with progressive, unresectable, well-differentiated pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor (NET). J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(Suppl):Abstract 4118.
26. Bruzoni M, Johnston E, Sasson AR. Pancreatic incidentalomas: clinical and pathologic spectrum. Am J Surg 2008;195:329-32; discussion 32.