Short Time to Progression under First-Line Chemotherapy Is a Negative Prognostic Factor for Time to Progression and Residual Survival under Second-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Oncology ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 73 (5-6) ◽  
pp. 335-339 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Herrmann ◽  
Ulrich Abel ◽  
Wolfgang Stremmel ◽  
Dirk Jaeger ◽  
Thomas Herrmann
2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 296-296 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adnan Nagrial ◽  
Venessa T. Chin ◽  
Katrin Sjoquist ◽  
Lorraine A. Chantrill ◽  
Desmond Yip

296 Background: There is currently no standard of care for the second-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Very few randomised studies have been performed in this setting. The aim of this analysis was to compare the different therapeutic approaches in this setting, and the rate of second line treatment delivery and its influence on reported overall survival. Methods: We carried out a systematic analysis of studies in advanced pancreatic cancer. 1st and 2nd line chemotherapy trials were identified from MEDLINE, EMBASE & CENTRAL using the COCHRANE sensitive search strategy. Objective response rates (ORR) and survival (PFS & OS) were extracted and compared amongst groups using the Mann-Whitney U test. For 1st line studies, the percentage of patients who received 2nd line chemotherapy was also extracted and plotted against reported median overall survival (OS) and post-progression survival (PPS), defined as arithmetic difference between median OS and progression-free survival. Linear regression was used to explore the relationship between overall survival and second-line chemotherapy. Results: 20 first line clinical trials with 42 treatment arms met the inclusion criteria treating an aggregate total of 5,768 patients. Overall survival was positively correlated with use of second-line chemotherapy (r=0.65; p=0.012). 61 second-line studies were identified treating an aggregate total of 2,562 patients in 66 treatment arms. Combination treatment was associated with an improved response rate (p=0.045) and PFS (p=0.024) when compared to single agent therapy. Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis, these data suggest that there is a small benefit of second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer. In first-line chemotherapy studies, the use of subsequent treatment correlates with improved overall survival. In second line studies, combination chemotherapy is associated with higher response rates and survival.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 15187-15187 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Herrmann ◽  
D. Jaeger ◽  
W. Stremmel ◽  
C. Herrmann

15187 Background: Patients with advanced pancreatic cancer profit from palliative chemotherapy. The role of second-line chemotherapy is not yet established. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis in 98 patients who were treated at our department from 1/2004–6/2006 due to locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Results: At the time of analysis 67 patients had died (median overall survival 9 months), 31 patients are still alive (median follow up 9 months). 12 patients were initially treated with radiochemotherapy. 86 patients received systemic chemotherapy; 43 of these patients were treated with second-line chemotherapy after disease progression. OS was significantly longer in patients who received second-line chemotherapy (10 months versus 5.0 months, p=0.023). Response to second-line chemotherapy was partial remission in 2 patients (4.6 %), stable disease in 18 patients (44.8 %), and progressive disease in 19 patients (44.2 %), in 3 patients the treatment was stopped due to toxicity (6.9 %). 12 patients received second-line treatment after early disease progression under first-line chemotherapy. 9 of these patients did not respond to second-line treatment, 2 achieved stable disease and 1 patient had partial remission. Elevated LDH and CA19.9 serum levels at the time of diagnosis were identified as negative prognostic factors. Conclusions: Prognosis of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer is still poor. Selected patients may benefit from salvage chemotherapy after failure of first-line chemotherapy. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e14680-e14680
Author(s):  
Milton Jose B. Silva ◽  
Joyce Maria L. Maia ◽  
Adriana Regina G. Ribeiro ◽  
Ludmilla T. D. Chinen ◽  
Tadeu Ferreira Paiva Jr ◽  
...  

e14680 Background: Despite the lack of high-quality clinical trial data suggesting that second-line chemotherapy (SLC) may affect survival on metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC), most of centers utilizes them after the failure of initial treatment in patients who maintain a good performance status. The aim of the present study was to review our institutional experience with SLC and estimate its role in overall survival (OS). Methods: We performed a retrospective matched case-control analysis based on search of medical records in 106 consecutive patients with mPC at our institution. Patients received first line chemotherapy (FLC) and SLC (n = 49) or FLC only (n =57) from September 2005 to December 2010. Case matching was performed with respect to age (< 60y versus ≥ 60y), topography (head of the pancreas versus body or tail), sites of metastasis. Overall survival was analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Median age was 63 (32-86) and 60 (38-85) for SLC group and FLC group respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding topography, TNM stage at diagnosis, and sites of metastasis. The main site of metastasis was the liver (24,4%), followed by peritoneum (2,8%).Median follow-up of both groups was 8.4 months (0.23m-54.93m). First line treatment consisted of Gemcitabine (55.1% x 49.1%) and gemcitabine + cisplatin (18.4%x14%) in SLC and FLC group respectively. The most used second line treatment was Capecitabine (32.7%), followed by Folfox (16.3%), and Fluoracil (10.2%). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the overall median survival, 1-year and 2-years survival rate was 15.72 months versus 7.2 months (p:0.021), and 60% vs. 32%, and 30% vs. 19% in SLC and FLC group, respectively. Conclusions: Our result suggests that second-line chemotherapy may be beneficial to improve overall survival in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. It’s important that new and ongoing clinical trials clarify which is the best chemotherapy scheme in this setting.


2012 ◽  
Vol 69 (6) ◽  
pp. 1641-1645 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alberto Zaniboni ◽  
Enrico Aitini ◽  
Sandro Barni ◽  
Daris Ferrari ◽  
Stefano Cascinu ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 23 ◽  
pp. iv65
Author(s):  
Milton Jose Barros e Silva ◽  
Joyce Maria L. Maia ◽  
Adriana Regina Goncalves Ribeiro ◽  
Ludmilla T.D. Chinen ◽  
Tadeu Paiva Junior ◽  
...  

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 14107-14107
Author(s):  
A. Mancuso ◽  
P. Saletti ◽  
S. Sacchetta ◽  
E. Romagnani ◽  
F. Cavalli ◽  
...  

14107 Background: Recent advances in the treatment of pancreatic cancer might influence the management of locally advanced and metastatic disease, nonetheless prognosis remains dismal (1-year survival rates: 24%). The impact on survival of palliative second-line therapy is hotly debated. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the clinical records of 103 pancreatic cancer patients admitted to San Camillo/Forlanini Hospital (Rome, Italy) and the Oncology Institute of Southern Switzerland during the period June, 1997 to August, 2005 [60 males, 43 females, median age 65 years (range 43–80); median ECOG performance status (PS): 1]. All patients received Gemcitabine as single agent (90%) or in combination with Oxaliplatin (10%) as upfront therapy. A total of 12 fluoropyrimidine-based salvage regimens were administered to 46 patients in the second line setting. Best supportive care was selected in 57 patients after failing first line therapy. Results: Of 103 evaluable patients, first line chemotherapy produced overall tumor growth control of partial response (PR) and stable disease(SD) by RECIST criteria of 52.4% with a median progression free survival (PFS) of 4.6 months. Multivariate analysis revealed that the most important prognostic factor for PFS was the patient’s PS, as patients with PS of 1–2 at diagnosis had significantly worse results than patients with PS = 0 (First line PFS: 110 days vs 193 days, p<0.05). Baseline CA19–9 and number of metastatic sites were not independent prognostic factors for better first-line PFS. PR was observed in 8/46 patients (17.3%) who received second line chemotherapy, SD in 10 (21.7%), and 28 patients progressed (61%). Median overall second line PFS was 3.2 months. Patients who had responded to first-line Gemcitabine were more likely to respond or attain stable disease with second-line treatment, with a PFS of 5.6 vs 2.85 months (p<0.05). The overall survival for all evaluable patients was 8.4 months. 1-year survival was 52% for patients treated with second line therapy. Conclusions: These results are consistent with historical studies and suggest that fluoropyrimidine-based salvage regimens have marginal but definite activity and should be considered in patients who have responded to first line chemotherapy with an optimal PS. No significant financial relationships to disclose.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document