Dataset Information

MiR-21 expression and clinical outcome in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: exploratory analysis of the pancreatic cancer Erbitux, radiotherapy and UFT (PERU) trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is associated with high mortality, and biomarker-driven treatment approach is currently lacking. This study evaluated safety and efficacy of a combination approach of chemotherapy followed by chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) +/- cetuximab, and the prognostic role of miR-21 in patients with LAPC treated with a multimodality approach.

Patients and methods

This was a randomised phase II trial in which patients with inoperable LAPC were offered gemcitabine and capecitabine (GEM-CAP) for 16 weeks. Patients with stable disease or response after GEM-CAP were randomised to capecitabine or UFT plus radiotherapy (RT) (A), or capecitabine or UFT plus cetuximab plus RT (B). The primary outcome of the study was overall survival (OS). Clinical outcome was compared according to baseline circulating miR-21 levels.

Results

17 patients were enrolled and treated with GEM-CAP, with 13 patients achieving disease control and being randomised to arms A (n:7) and B (n:6). After a median follow-up of 61.2 months, median progression free survival (PFS) was 10.4 months and 12.7 months, median OS was 15.8 months and 22.0 months in arms A and B respectively (p > 0.05). Patients with high baseline plasma miR-21 had worse PFS (3.5 vs. 12.7 months; p:0.032) and OS (5.1 vs 15.3 months; p:0.5) compared to patients with low miR-21. Circulating miR-21 levels reflected miR-21 expression within the tissues.

Conclusions

Addition of Cetuximab to CRT following induction chemotherapy did not improve survival. High miR-21 baseline plasma expression was associated with poor clinical outcome in LAPC patients treated with induction chemotherapy followed by chemo-radiotherapy.

SUBMITTER: Khan K

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4914313 | biostudies-literature | 2016 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

miR-21 expression and clinical outcome in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: exploratory analysis of the pancreatic cancer Erbitux, radiotherapy and UFT (PERU) trial.

Khan Khurum K Cunningham David D Peckitt Clare C Barton Sarah S Tait Diana D Hawkins Maria M Watkins David D Starling Naureen N Rao Sheela S Begum Ruwaida R Thomas Janet J Oates Jacqui J Guzzardo Vincenza V Fassan Matteo M Braconi Chiara C Chau Ian I

Oncotarget 20160301 11

<h4>Background</h4>Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is associated with high mortality, and biomarker-driven treatment approach is currently lacking. This study evaluated safety and efficacy of a combination approach of chemotherapy followed by chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) +/- cetuximab, and the prognostic role of miR-21 in patients with LAPC treated with a multimodality approach.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>This was a randomised phase II trial in which patients with inoperable LAPC were off ...[more]

PMID: 26862857

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveTo assess the efficacy of a Risk-Adapted Ablative Radiotherapy (RAdAR) approach, after intensive induction chemotherapy, in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).Material and methodsPatients with LAPC who received RAdAR following induction chemotherapy from January 2017 to December 2019 were included in this observational study. The RAdAR approach consisted of an anatomy- and simultaneous integrated boost (SIB)-based dose prescription strategy. RAdAR was delivered with stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SAbR), administering 30 Gy in 5 fractions to the tumor volume (PTVt) and 50 Gy SIB (BED10 100 Gy) to the vascular involvement, or with (hypo-)fractionated ablative radiotherapy (HART) prescribing 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions to the PTVt, with a vascular SIB of 78.4 Gy (BED10 100 Gy). Primary end points were freedom from local progression (FFLP), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsSixty-four LAPC patients were included. Induction chemotherapy consisted of gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in 60.9% and FOLFIRINOX in 39.1% of cases. SAbR was used in 52 (81.2%) patients, and HART in 12 (18.8%). After RAdAR, surgery was performed in 17 (26.6%) patients. Median follow-up was 16.1 months. Overall local control (LC) rate was 78.1%, with no difference between resected and non-resected patients (2-year FFLP 75.3% vs 56.4%; p = 0.112). Median OS and PFS were 29.7 months and 8.7 months, respectively, for the entire cohort. Resected patients had a better median OS (not reached versus 26.1 months; p = 0.0001) and PFS (19 versus 5.6 months; p < 0.0001) compared to non-resected patients. In non-resected patients, no significant difference was found between SAbR and HART for median FFLP (28.1 versus 18.5 months; p = 0.614), OS (27.4 versus 25.3 months; p = 0.624), and PFS (5.7 versus 4.3 months; p = 0.486). One patient (1.6%) experienced acute grade 4 gastro-intestinal bleeding. No other acute or late grade ≥ 3 toxicities were observed.ConclusionsThe RAdAR approach, following intensive induction chemotherapy, is an effective radiation treatment strategy for selected LAPC patients, representing a promising therapeutic option in a multimodality treatment regimen.

Project description:BackgroundThere is no agreed upon standard of care for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) or locally-advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients regarding the benefit of chemotherapy or radiation alone or in combination.Patients and methodsWe completed a retrospective cohort analysis of BRPC and LAPC patients at a cancer center with expertise in multi-disciplinary pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treatment over a 5-year period from 03/01/2014 to 03/01/2019 (cut-off date). The total evaluable newly diagnosed, treatment naïve, BRPC, and LAPC patients with adequate organ function and ability to obtain treatment after multidisciplinary review was 52 patients. After analysis, patients were evaluated for rates of resection, extent of resection (R0 or R1), median progression-free survival (mPFS), and median overall survival (mOS).ResultsPatients were treated with chemotherapy alone (gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel = 77% (20/26); FOLFIRINOX = 19% (5/26); single agent gemcitabine 3.8% (1/26)), or chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation (gemcitabine +5 Gy × 5 weeks), or chemoradiation alone prior to re-staging and potential resection. Of the 29% (15/52) of patients who went on to surgical resection, 73% (11/15) achieved R0 resection. An R0 resection was achieved in 35% (9/26) of patients treated with chemotherapy alone, 7.6% (1/13) in a patient treated with chemotherapy followed by radiation, and 7.6% (1/13) with concurrent chemoradiotherapy alone. Chemotherapy alone achieved a mPFS of 16.4 months (p < 0.0025) and mOS of 26.2 months (p < 0.0001), chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation was 13.0 months and 14.9 months respectively, while concurrent chemoradiotherapy was 6.9 months and 7.3 months.Conclusions and relevanceBRPC and LAPC patients capable of surgery after only receiving neoadjuvant treatment with chemotherapy had higher rates of R0 resection with prolonged median PFS and OS compared with any patient needing combination chemotherapy with radiotherapy.

Project description:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is currently ranked fourth place of cancer related mortality. Only a minority of 10-20% of patients with PDAC have a primarily resectable disease, while 50-60% of the patients are diagnosed with irresectable disease. A certain group of patients is defined as "borderline resectable", which is mainly relied to contact of the tumor to major abdominal vessels. For preoperative evaluation of resectability CT and MRI is commonly used. Although CT-scanning, which is the standard preoperative imaging modality, has striking limitations concerning evaluation of lymph node status as well as vessel involvement and approximately 20% of the patients are staged incorrectly. A central part of modern therapy of locally advanced or not primarily resectable PDAC is neoadjuvant therapy. Especially neoadjuvant chemotherapy according to the FOLFIRINOX protocol resulted in high resection rates of initially not resectable patients. Furthermore, treatment with FOLFIRINOX was shown to be an independent predictor of improved prognosis and resection after neoadjuvant treatment with FOLFIRINOX was associated with improved survival. Neoadjuvant treatment was able to increases the rates of R0 resection, which depicts an independent prognostic factor and FOLFIRINOX outmatched other treatment regimes (e.g., gemcitabine-based radio-chemotherapy) concerning achievement of a R0 resection. While most evidence of neoadjuvant treatment of PDAC is conferred by retrospective analysis, there is growing data from randomized controlled trials, confirming the beneficial effects of neoadjuvant therapy on the prognosis of PDAC. Thus, patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced PDAC should be evaluated for neoadjuvant treatment. If there is no progression of the disease during neoadjuvant treatment exploration with the goal of R0 resection should be performed. If possible, patients should be included in well-designed randomized controlled trials at specialized pancreatic centers.