HIGHLIGHT ARTICLE

 

JOP. J Pancreas (Online) 2012 Mar 10; 13(2):155-158.

 

 

Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Update and Progress

Highlights from the “2012 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium”.
San Francisco, CA, USA. January 19-21, 2012

 

 

John Ng, Chi Zhang, Daniela Gidea-Addeo, Muhammad Wasif Saif

 

 

Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York Presbyterian Hospital. New York, NY, USA

 

 

Summary

Pancreatic cancer, the 4th leading cause of cancer death in the U.S., remains a challenging disease for the oncology community. Less than 20% of all cases are potentially cured by surgical resection, while the large majority of cases are deemed either unresectable or metastatic upon diagnosis. Advances in treating locally advanced pancreatic cancer have been few and modest. In this year’s American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, three abstracts (#252, #254, #313) were presented with novel approaches towards treating locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Surgery for recurrent disease, a promising new chemoradiation regimen, and the application of an exciting multi-agent regimen (FOLFIRINOX: oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil) in a non-clinical trial setting, highlight the novel approaches focused on the management of this difficult disease.

 

 

Introduction

 

In 2012, there will be an estimated 43,920 new cases and 37,390 deaths attributed to pancreatic cancer in the United States [1]. The prognosis of pancreatic cancer, regardless of stage, is extremely poor, with a 1-year survival rate of 25% and a 5-year survival rate of less than 5%. Only a small percentage of patients are able to undergo complete surgical resection with potential curative intent. The large majority of patients with pancreatic cancer present either with locally advanced or metastatic disease upon diagnosis. For patients at these advanced, surgically unresectable stages, median survival ranges from 8 to 12 months [2].

There are different treatment approaches to locally advanced pancreatic cancer management, including single or multi-agent chemotherapy, chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation, or immediate concurrent chemoradiation [3]. A summary of several key randomized trials on locally advanced pancreatic cancer treatment which led to these different approaches is shown in Table 1 [2].

 

 

Table 1. Selected key randomized trials of evidence-based treatment approaches for locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Study

Enrollment

Treatments

Median survival (months)

P value

Comments

GITSG
1988 [4]

43

Streptozocin, mitomycin, 5-FU vs.
54Gy + 5-FU (bolus)
-> Streptozocin, mitomycin, 5-FU

8 (Chemotherapy) vs.
10.5 (Chemoradiotherapy)

<0.02

Low patient accrual

ECOG
Klaassen et al.,
1985 [5]

91

5-FU (bolus) vs.
40 Gy + 5-FU (bolus)
-> 5-FU

8.2 (Chemotherapy) vs.
8.3 (Chemoradiotherapy)

Non significant

Chemoradiation more toxic

FFCD/SFRO
Chauffert et al.,
2008 [6]

119

Gemcitabine vs.
60 Gy + 5-FU (c.i.) + cisplatin
-> Gemcitabine

13 (Chemotherapy) vs.
8.6 (Chemoradiotherapy)

0.03

Chemoradiation significantly more toxic. Unconventional radiation fields

ECOG
Loehrer et al.,
2011 [7]

74

Gemcitabine vs.
50.4 Gy + gemcitabine
-> gemcitabine

9.2 (Chemotherapy) vs.
11 (Chemoradiotherapy)

0.04

Favored chemoradiation

PRODIGE
Conroy et al.,
2011 [8]

342

Gemcitabine vs.
FOLFIRINOX
(5-FU, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin)

6.8 (gemcitabine) vs.
11.1 (FOLFIRINOX)

<0.001

Metastatic disease.
FOLFIRINOX more toxic.
FOLFIRINOX improved survival.

5-FU: 5-fluorouracil; c.i.: continuous infusion; ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FFCD-SFRO: Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive and Societe Francaise de Radiotherapie Oncologique; FOLFIRINOX: 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin; GITSG: Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group; PRODIGE: Partenarait de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive

 

 

As each of varied approaches are limited in their efficacy, much attention and resources have been devoted to finding novel approaches towards treating locally advanced staged pancreatic cancer. These novel approaches seek to improve overall survival, distal or regional disease control, and/or quality of life. This highlight article will review three key abstracts published at the 2012 American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, focusing on several new treatment options to treat locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

 

Updates from the 2012 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

 

Selective Reoperation for Locally Recurrent or Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Following Primary Pancreatic Resection (Abstract #252 [9])

 

Thomas et al. presented a single-institutional retrospective study examining the potential for selective reoperation for patients with recurrent disease, a stage which has traditionally been viewed as surgically futile. In their study, they reviewed all patients from 1992-2010 identified in their database who developed recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma after intended surgical cure. Of 700 patients who underwent resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma, 426 patients developed recurrent disease. Twenty-one (5%) of the recurrent patients were then selected for a second, potentially curative operation.

Their results were notable in that patients who were able to undergo a second resection (single technically resectable lesion, good performance status) had a significantly longer disease free interval relative to patients who were not selected. Furthermore, patients who had a surgically resectable lung metastasis had a longer interval between re-operation and second recurrence vs. patients with a liver or locoregional recurrence (no recurrence vs. 7.5 months; P=0.02). Four of the seven patients with resected lung metastasis were still alive after 30 months of follow-up from the reoperation.

The authors concluded that patient who develop a solitary lung recurrence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma to the lung after a long disease-free interval should be considered for reoperation. Other sites of recurrence did not appear to benefit as much from reoperation.

 

Phase I Trial of Radiotherapy with Concurrent Bevacizumab, Erlotinib, and Capecitabine for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer (LAPC) (Abstract #254 [10])

 

Skinner et al. presented the results of their phase I study looking at the multiagent regimen of bevacizumab, erlotinib, and capecitabine given concurrently with 50.4 Gy (gross tumor volume (GTV) only) in 28 fractions. The study enrolled 17 patients with biopsy-proven non-metastatic unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer. All of these cases had CT staging and had been deemed either borderline resectable or unresectable. All patients received 50.4 Gy (GTV only) in 28 fractions with concurrent capecitabine, bevacizumab and erlotinib, with prior chemotherapy permitted. The dose escalations of agents are shown in Table 2.

 

 

Table 2. Summary of concurrent multiagent chemoradiation with dose escalation (Abstract #254, Skinner et al. [10]).

Dose level

1

2

3

4

5

Number of patients

2

2

2

2

9

Bevacizumab (mg/kg every 2 weeks)

5

5

5

5

10

Erlotinib (mg/day)

100

100

150

150

150

Capecitabine (mg/m2 bid on days of radiation)

400

600

600

825

825

Grade 3 toxicity

0

0

0

0

3 patients (33%)

Grade 4/5 toxicity

0

0

0

0

0

 

 

After reassessment for resectability 6-8 weeks later after treatment, 5 patients (4 were originally deemed unresectable and 1 was borderline) achieved margin-negative resections, of whom 4 were treated at dose levels 4 or 5; 3 patients had excellent pathological responses including one complete response at pancreatectomy and are alive up to 22 months with no local or distant failures, comparing to median survival of 24 months for patients treated at dose levels 4 and 5, and median survival of 19.4 months for all patients enrolled.

The authors concluded that concurrent radiotherapy with combination of erlotinib, bevacizumab and capecitabine for locally advanced pancreatic cancer is safe which may achieve promising survival and high rate of resectability at the higher dose levels. A role of dual inhibition of growth factor receptor pathways during chemoradiation is suggested and future evaluations are warranted.

 

FOLFIRINOX in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer (Abstract #313 [11])

 

Faris et al. presented with their retrospective study examining the efficacy and toxicity of 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) at their institution for both metastatic and locally advanced disease in the non-clinical trial setting. FOLFIRINOX has garnered a great deal of recent interest as it has been demonstrated in a phase III trial that FOLFIRINOX improved survival compared to gemcitabine in good performance status patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer [8]. The authors followed up on this trial by a retrospective study in their institutional experience on the efficacy and tolerability of FOLFIRINOX. A summary of their results with clinical characteristics and gradable toxicities is shown in Table 3. Formal radiographic reviews were performed to determine best overall response rates.

 

 

Table 3. Summary of FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin) in the non-clinical trial setting (Abstract #313, Faris et al. [11]).

 

All patients
(n=29)

Locally advanced
(n=12)

Metastatic
(n=17)

Median age (years)

60

NA

NA

Gender:
- Male
- Female


22 (75.9%)
7 (24.1%)

NA

NA

Number of prior chemoradiation cycles

18

NA

NA

Performance status:
- ECOG: 0-1
- ECOG: 2


28 (96.6%)
1 (3.4%)

NA

NA

Biliary stents

8 (27.6%)

NA

NA

Median number of cycles

NA

8

8

Partial response
(overall response rate)

11 (37.9%)
10/11 (90.9%) were chemo-naïve

5 (41.7%)

6 (35.3%)

Stable disease

18 (62.1%)

7 (58.3%)

11 (64.7%)

Emergency department visit or hospitalization

12 (41.4%)

NA

NA

Grade 3/4 neutropenia

10 (34.5%)

NA

NA

Febrile neutropenia

4 (13.8%)

NA

NA

Grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia

4 (13.8%)

NA

NA

Grade 4 anemia

1 (3.4%)

NA

NA

ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; NA: not available from abstract

 

 

In the non-clinical trial setting, the authors concluded that FOLFIRINOX demonstrated activity in both the metastatic and locally-advanced settings with more than one of three patients showing partial response. However, this regimen is associated with manageable, but significant toxicities, with over 40% of patients requiring emergency department visit or hospitalization.

 

Summary

 

A summary of the three abstracts (#252, #254, and #313) on locally advanced pancreatic cancer from the 2012 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium is shown in Table 4.

 

 

Table 4. Selected key abstracts on locally advanced pancreatic cancer from the 2012 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium.

 

Study design

Enrollment

Endpoint data

Toxicities

Comments

Abstract #252
Thomas et al.
[9]

Retrospective review

21 patients

Disease-free interval:
22 months (reoperation) vs.
8 months (patients who were not selected for reoperation)
(P<0.01).

Not reported

Patients with solitary resectable lung metastasis may derive the most benefit from reoperation

Abstract #254
Skinner et al.
[10]

Prospective, phase I trial

17 patients

Median survival: 19.4 months;
time to progression: 9.8 months

No grade 4 or 5 toxicity in all dose levels;
33% grade 3 toxicity in dose level 4

Promising early results;
may improve resectability rate

Abstract #313
Faris et al.
[11]

Retrospective review

29 patients

Overall response rate: 38%

Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia: 10 patients;
Grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia: 4 patients;
Grade 4 anemia: 1 patient;
12/29 patients required emergency department visit or hospitalization

FOLFIRINOX appears to be associated with manageable but significant toxicities;
38% patients showed partial response

 

 

Discussion

 

The optimal therapy for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer remains unclear. There is data to support treatment with chemotherapy alone, chemoradiation, or induction chemotherapy followed by combined modality treatment. The choice of regimen can depend on patient age, comorbidities, and performance status and often varies amongst different institutions. To date, there has been no clear demonstration of a markedly superior treatment option for locally advanced pancreatic cancer, which carries a median survival of 10 to 13 months.

There appears to be several new approaches on the horizon that may add to the array of treatment strategies for this challenging disease. Gemcitabine has been an established standard with a reasonable toxicity profile and is often used either as a single agent or as an induction and maintenance regimen. The emergence of FOLFIRINOX in the metastatic setting has spurred interest in its use in the locally advanced setting [8]. From the work of Faris et al. (Abstract #313 [11]) there appears to be a role in FOLFIRINOX in both the metastatic and the locally advanced setting, and that while there are significant toxicities associated with this rigorous regimen, it can used effectively outside of a clinical trial setting. Erlotinib has also been shown to modestly improve survival when used in combination with gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic cancer in comparison to gemcitabine monotherapy in a phase III trial [12]. These results have led to its addition with bevacizumab in a multi-agent combination to improve the therapeutic window in the chemoradiation setting. The results of Skinner et al. (Abstract #254 [10]) suggest that it may improve resectability rate, but as a phase I trial, that conclusion will require further studies to be validated. Finally, recurrent/metastatic pancreatic cancer traditionally has been considered a surgically futile disease. The surgical literature from cancers of other sites, most notably colorectal cancer, has suggested that surgical resection of solitary metastases can lead to substantial long term survival [13]. The study by Thomas et al. (Abstract #252 [9]) would indicate that there may be certain subsets of recurrent metastatic pancreatic cancer patients who may greatly benefit from a second resection.

At present time, the treatment options for locally advanced pancreatic cancer confer modest results. As illustrated by recent presentations at the 2012 ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, tremendous work is being done in an effort to improve the outcome of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

 

 

Key words Combined Modality Therapy; erlotinib; Fluorouracil; gemcitabine; Pancreatic Neoplasms; Radiation; Radiotherapy

 

Abbreviations ASCO: American Society of Clinical Oncology; ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; FFCD-SFRO: Federation Francophone de Cancerologie Digestive and Societe Francaise de Radiotherapie Oncologique; FOLFIRINOX: 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, leucovorin; GITSG: Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group; GTV: gross tumor volume; PRODIGE: Partenarait de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive

 

Conflict of interest The authors have no potential conflicts of interest

 

Correspondence
Daniela Gidea-Addeo
Department of Radiation Oncology
Columbia University Medical Center
622 West 168th St. B-11
New York, NY 10032
USA
Phone: +1-212.305.2991
Fax: +1-212.305.2141
E-mail: dg2607@mail.cumc.columbia.edu

 

 

References

1.    Siegel R,Naishadham D,Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62(1):10-29. (More details: [1]).

2.    Johung K, Saif MW, Chang BW. Treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer: the role of radiation therapy. Int J RadiatOncolBiol Phys. 2012; 82(2):508-18. (More details: [2]).

3.    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Practice guidelines in oncology: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. 2011. Available at:www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/pancreatic.pdf. (More details: [3]).

4.    Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group. Treatment of locally unresectable carcinoma of the pancreas: comparison of combined-modality therapy (chemotherapy plus radiotherapy) to chemotherapy alone. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1988 Jul 20;80(10):751-5. (More details: [4]).

5.    Klaassen DJ, MacIntyre JM, Catton GE, et al. Treatment of locally unresectable cancer of the stomach and pancreas: A randomized comparison of 5-fluorouracil alone with radiation plus concurrent and maintenance 5-fluorouracil - an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group study. J ClinOncol. 1985;3:373-378. (More details: [5]).

6.    Chauffert B, Mornex F, Bonnetain F, et al. Phase III trial comparing intensive induction chemoradiotherapy (60 Gy, infusional 5-FU and intermittent cisplatin) followed by maintenance gemcitabine with gemcitabine alone for locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. Definitive resultsof the 20 Ann Oncol. 2008;19:1592-1599. (More details: [6]).

7.    Loehrer PJ Sr, Feng Y, Cardenes H, et al. Gemcitabine Alone Versus Gemcitabine Plus Radiotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: An Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial. J ClinOncol.2011;29:4105-4112. (More details: [7]).

8.    Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M, et al. FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(19):1817-25. (More details: [8]).

9.    Thomas RM, Truty MJ, Fleming JB, Pisters PWT, Lee JE, Rice DC, et al. Selective reoperation for locally recurrent or metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma following primary pancreatic resection. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30(Suppl 4):Abstract 252. (More details: [9]).

10. Skinner HD, Javle MM, Wolff RA, Clemons MV, Munsell MF, Delclos ME, et al. Phase I trial of radiotherapy with concurrent bevacizumab, erlotinib, and capecitabine for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). J Clin Oncol 2012, 30(Suppl 4):Abstract 254. (More details: [10]).

11. Faris JE, Hong TS, McDermott S, Guimaraes AR, Sahani D, Clark JW, et al. FOLFIRINOX in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol 2012, 30(Suppl 4):Abstract 313. (More details: [11]).

12. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, et al. Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:1960-6. (More details: [12]).

13. Scheele J, Altendorf-Hofmann A. Resection of colorectal liver metastases. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 1999;384(4):313-27. (More details: [13]).