Phase I trial of GBS-01 for advanced pancreatic cancer refractory to gemcitabine.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ikeda M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5198948 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:AIM:To evaluate the efficacy and safety of modified FOLFIRINOX as a second-line treatment for gemcitabine (GEM)-refractory unresectable pancreatic cancer (PC). METHODS:This study was a prospective, multicenter, one-arm, open-label, phase II trial. Patients with unresectable PC, who showed disease progression during GEM-based chemotherapy were enrolled. All patients were administered FOLFIRINOX with reduced irinotecan and oxaliplatin (RIO; irinotecan 120 mg/m2 and oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2), which was set according to the phase I study of FOLFIRINOX. The objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), adverse events were evaluated. Additionally, changes in quality of life (QoL) were assessed using a questionnaire on QoL. RESULTS:Between August 2015 and May 2016, a total of 48 patients were enrolled. The median follow-up time was 259 d with a median of 8.5 cycles. The ORR and DCR were 18.8% and 62.5%, respectively, including one patient who showed complete remission. The median PFS was 5.8 mo [95% confidence interval (CI): 3.7-7.9] and median OS was 9.0 mo (95%CI: 6.4-11.6). Neutropenia (64.6%) was the most common grade 3-4 adverse event, followed by febrile neutropenia (16.7%). Although 14.6% of patients experienced grade 3 fatigue, most non-hematologic AEs were under grade 2. In the QoL analysis, the global health status score before treatment was not different from the score at the last visit after treatment (45.43 ± 22.88 vs 48.66 ± 24.14, P = 0.548). CONCLUSION:FOLFIRINOX with RIO showed acceptable toxicity and promising efficacy for GEM-refractory unresectable PC. However, this treatment requires careful observation of treatment-related hematologic toxicities.
| S-EPMC6304301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background Cabozantinib and gemcitabine improve tumor control in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in preclinical models through c-Met inhibition. We sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of this combination in patients with advanced PDAC. Methods Patients with ?1 prior treatment and adequate performance status were eligible. Cabozantinib was given orally once daily, beginning day (-)7 and continued with gemcitabine given intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days. Dose level was assigned using Time to Event Continual Reassessment Method (TITE-CRM). Primary endpoint was MTD, defined as the highest dose level at which ?25 % of patients incurred a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Secondary endpoints included response rate, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and urinary biomarker assessment. Results Twelve patients were enrolled and treated with 10 patients evaluable for DLT. The probability of DLT was >25 % for all dose levels tested, and thus an MTD was not determined. DLTs included grade 3 ALT/AST elevations and thrombocytopenia. Three patients had partial responses, but each discontinued therapy due to toxicity. Median PFS and OS were 4.7 (95 % CI: 1.4-9.7) and 10.1 months (95 % CI: 3.6-20.6). Exploratory biomarker analysis showed correlation of c-Met and VEGF levels with response. Conclusions An MTD for the combination was not established. Cabozantinib and gemcitabine appear impractical for further development due to DLT at low doses and continuing toxicities with ongoing therapy. Acknowledging the small sample size, responses were seen suggesting further investigation of c-Met inhibition in PDAC may be warranted.
| S-EPMC7458140 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Standard chemoradiotherapy with infusional 5FU for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) has limited efficacy in this disease. The combination of Capecitabine (Cap) and Gemcitabine (Gem) are synergistic and are potent radiosensitisers. The aim of this phase I trial was thus to determine the highest administered dose of the Cap plus Gem combination with radical radiotherapy (RT) for LAPC. Patients had LAPC, adequate organ function, ECOG PS 0-1. During RT, Gem was escalated from 20-50 mg m(-2) day(-1) (twice per week), and Cap 800-2000 mg m(-2) day(-1) (b.i.d, days 1-5 of each week). Radiotherapy 50.4 Gy/28 fractions/5.5 weeks, using 3D-conformal techniques. Three patients were entered to each dose level (DL). Dose-limiting toxicity(s) (DLTs) were based on treatment-related toxicities. Twenty patients were accrued. Dose level (DL) 1: Cap/Gem; 800/20 mg m(-2) day(-1) (3 patients), DL2: 1000/20 (12 patients), DL3: 1300/30 (5 patients). Dose-limiting toxicities were observed in DL3; grade 3 dehydration (1 patient) and grade 3 diarrhoea and dehydration (1 patient). Dose level 2 was the recommend phase 2 dose. Disease control rate was 75%: PR=15%, SD=60%. Median overall survival was 11.2 months. The addition of Cap and Gem to radical RT was feasible and active and achieved at relatively low doses.
| S-EPMC2634693 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeTH-302 is an investigational hypoxia-activated prodrug that releases the DNA alkylator bromo-isophosphoramide mustard in hypoxic settings. This phase II study (NCT01144455) evaluated gemcitabine plus TH-302 in patients with previously untreated, locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer.Patients and methodsPatients were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2)), gemcitabine plus TH-302 240 mg/m(2) (G+T240), or gemcitabine plus TH-302 340 mg/m(2) (G+T340). Randomized crossover after progression on gemcitabine was allowed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), tumor response, CA 19-9 response, and safety.ResultsTwo hundred fourteen patients (77% with metastatic disease) were enrolled between June 2010 and July 2011. PFS was significantly longer with gemcitabine plus TH-302 (pooled combination arms) compared with gemcitabine alone (median PFS, 5.6 v 3.6 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.87; P = .005; median PFS for metastatic disease, 5.1 v 3.4 months, respectively). Median PFS times for G+T240 and G+T340 were 5.6 and 6.0 months, respectively. Tumor response was 12%, 17%, and 26% in the gemcitabine, G+T240, and G+T340 arms, respectively (G+T340 v gemcitabine, P = .04). CA 19-9 decrease was greater with G+T340 versus gemcitabine (-5,398 v -549 U/mL, respectively; P = .008). Median OS times for gemcitabine, G+T240, and G+T340 were 6.9, 8.7, and 9.2 months, respectively (P = not significant). The most common adverse events (AEs) were fatigue, nausea, and peripheral edema (frequencies similar across arms). Skin and mucosal toxicities (2% grade 3) and myelosuppression (55% grade 3 or 4) were the most common TH-302-related AEs but were not associated with treatment discontinuation.ConclusionPFS, tumor response, and CA 19-9 response were significantly improved with G+TH-302. G+T340 is being investigated further in the phase III MAESTRO study (NCT01746979).
| S-EPMC4881365 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of irinotecan/S-1 (IRIS) therapy with S-1 monotherapy in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.MethodsPatients were treated with oral S-1 (80-120 mg for 14 days every 4 weeks) plus intravenous irinotecan (100 mg m-2 on days 1 and 15 every 4 weeks; IRIS group) or oral S-1 group (80-120 mg daily for 28 days every 6 weeks). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsOf 137 patients enrolled, 127 were eligible for efficacy. The median PFS in the IRIS group and S-1 monotherapy group were 3.5 and 1.9 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR)=0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.53-1.11; P=0.18), while the median overall survival (OS) were 6.8 and 5.8 months, respectively (HR=0.75; 95% CI, 0.51-1.09; P=0.13). Response rate was significantly higher in the IRIS group than in the S-1 monotherapy group (18.3% vs 6.0%, P=0.03). Grade 3 or higher neutropenia and anorexia occurred more frequently in the IRIS group.ConclusionsThere was a trend for better PFS and OS in the IRIS group that could be a treatment arm in the clinical trials for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.
| S-EPMC5318973 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: This randomised, open-label, multicenter phase II study compared progression-free survival (PFS) of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) with that of S-1 alone in patients with gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Patients with confirmed progressive disease following the first-line treatment with a gemcitabine-based regimen were randomised to receive either S-1 (80/100/120 mg day(-1) based on body surface area (BSA), orally, days 1-28, every 6 weeks) or SOX (S-1 80/100/120 mg day(-1) based on BSA, orally, days 1-14, plus oxaliplatin 100 mg m(-2), intravenously, day 1, every 3 weeks). The primary end point was PFS. RESULTS: Between January 2009 and July 2010, 271 patients were randomly allocated to either S-1 (n=135) or SOX (n=136). Median PFS for S-1 and SOX were 2.8 and 3.0 months, respectively (hazard ratio (HR)=0.84; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.65-1.08; stratified log-rank test P=0.18). Median overall survival (OS) was 6.9 vs 7.4 months (HR=1.03; 95% CI, 0.79-1.34; stratified log-rank test P=0.82). The response rate (RR) was 11.5% vs 20.9% (P=0.04). The major grade 3/4 toxicities (S-1 and SOX) were neutropenia (11.4% and 8.1%), thrombocytopenia (4.5% and 10.3%) and anorexia (12.9% and 14.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Although SOX showed an advantage in RR, it provided no significant improvement in PFS or OS compared with S-1 alone.
| S-EPMC4453667 | biostudies-other
Project description:BackgroundPancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains resistant to chemotherapy and immunotherapy individually because of its desmoplastic stroma and immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Synergizing cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) immune checkpoint blockade with chemotherapy could overcome these barriers. Here we present results of a phase Ib trial combining ipilimumab and gemcitabine in advanced PDAC.Materials and methodsThis was a single-institution study with a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary objectives included determining the toxicity profile, objective response rate (ORR), median progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).ResultsTwenty-one patients were enrolled, 13 during dose escalation and 8 at the MTD. The median age was 66 years, 62% were female, 95% had stage IV disease, and 67% had received at least one prior line of therapy. The primary objective to establish the MTD was achieved at doses of ipilimumab 3 mg/kg and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 . The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were anemia (48%), leukopenia (48%), and neutropenia (43%). The ORR was 14% (3/21), and seven patients had stable disease. Median response duration for the three responders was 11 months, with one response duration of 19.8 months. Median PFS was 2.78 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.61-4.83 months), and median OS was 6.90 months (95% CI, 2.63-9.57 months).ConclusionGemcitabine and ipilimumab is a safe and tolerable regimen for PDAC with a similar response rate to gemcitabine alone. As in other immunotherapy trials, responses were relatively durable in this study.Implications for practiceGemcitabine and ipilimumab is a safe and feasible regimen for treating advanced pancreatic cancer. Although one patient in this study had a relatively durable response of nearly 20 months, adding ipilimumab to gemcitabine does not appear to be more effective than gemcitabine alone in advanced pancreatic cancer.
| S-EPMC7216436 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeTargeting focal adhesion kinase (FAK) renders checkpoint immunotherapy effective in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) mouse model. Defactinib is a highly potent oral FAK inhibitor that has a tolerable safety profile.Patients and methodsWe conducted a multicenter, open-label, phase I study with dose escalation and expansion phases. In dose escalation, patients with refractory solid tumors were treated at five escalating dose levels of defactinib and gemcitabine to identify a recommended phase II dose (RP2D). In expansion phase, patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed on frontline treatment (refractory cohort) or had stable disease (SD) after at least 4 months of standard gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (maintenance cohort) were treated at RP2D. Pre- and posttreatment tumor biopsies were performed to evaluate tumor immunity.ResultsThe triple drug combination was well-tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities. Among 20 treated patients with refractory PDAC, the disease control rate (DCR) was 80%, with one partial response (PR) and 15 SDs, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 3.6 and 7.8 months, respectively. Among 10 evaluable patients in the maintenance cohort, DCR was 70% with one PR and six SDs. Three patients with SD came off study due to treatment- or disease-related complications. The median PFS and OS on study treatment were 5.0 and 8.3 months, respectively.ConclusionsThe combination of defactinib, pembrolizumab, and gemcitabine was well-tolerated and safe, had promising preliminary efficacy, and showed biomarker activity in infiltrative T lymphocytes. Efficacy of this strategy may require incorporation of more potent chemotherapy in future studies.
| S-EPMC9772237 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGemcitabine and cisplatin has limited benefit as treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC). The addition of an anti-programmed death receptor (PD-1)/PD-ligand (L1) antibody to either systemic chemotherapy or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 (CTLA4) antibody has shown benefit in multiple solid tumors.MethodsIn this phase 2 trial, patients 18 years or older with advanced BTC without prior systemic therapy and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status 0-1 were randomized across six academic centers. Patients in Arm A received nivolumab (360 mg) on day 1 along with gemcitabine and cisplatin on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks for 6 months followed by nivolumab (240 mg) every 2 weeks. Patients in Arm B received nivolumab (240 mg) every 2 weeks and ipilimumab (1 mg/kg) every 6 weeks.ResultsOf 75 randomized patients, 68 received therapy (Arm A = 35, Arm B = 33); 51.5% women with a median age of 62.5 years. The observed primary outcome of 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rates in the evaluable population was 59.4% in Arm A and 21.2% in Arm B. The median PFS and overall survival (OS) in Arm A were 6.6 and 10.6 months, and in Arm B 3.9 and 8.2 months, respectively, in patients who received any treatment. The most common treatment-related grade 3 or higher hematologic adverse event was neutropenia in 34.3% (Arm A) and nonhematologic adverse events were fatigue (8.6% Arm A) and elevated transaminases (9.1% Arm B).ConclusionsThe addition of nivolumab to chemotherapy or ipilimumab did not improve 6-month PFS. Although median OS was less than 12 months in both arms, the high OS rate at 2 years in Arm A suggests benefit in a small cohort of patients.
| S-EPMC9540241 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn the UK, chemotherapy is the standard treatment for inoperable, locally advanced, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. Chemoradiotherapy is also an acceptable treatment option, for which gemcitabine, fluorouracil, or capecitabine can be used as concurrent chemotherapy agents. We aimed to assess the activity, safety, and feasibility of both gemcitabine-based and capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy after induction chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer.MethodsIn this open-label, randomised, two-arm, phase 2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with histologically proven, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (with a tumour diameter of 7 cm or less) were recruited from 28 UK centres between Dec 24, 2009 and Oct 25, 2011. After 12 weeks of induction gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy (three cycles of gemcitabine [1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle] and capecitabine [830 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle]), patients with stable or responding disease, tumour diameter of 6 cm or less, and WHO performance status 0-1 were randomly assigned to receive a further cycle of gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy followed by either gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2) once per week) or capecitabine (830 mg/m(2) twice daily, Monday to Friday only), both in combination with radiation (50·4 Gy in 28 fractions). Randomisation (1:1) was done via a central computerised system and used stratified minimisation. The primary endpoint was 9-month progression-free survival, analysed by intention to treat including only those patients with valid CT assessments. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 96169987.Findings114 patients were registered and 74 were randomly allocated (38 to the gemcitabine group and 36 to the capecitabine group). After 9 months, 22 of 35 assessable patients (62·9%, 80% CI 50·6-73·9) in the capecitabine group and 18 of 35 assessable patients (51·4%, 39·4-63·4) in the gemcitabine group had not progressed. Median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·9-19·2) in the capecitabine group and 13·4 months (95% CI 11·0-15·7) in the gemcitabine group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 95% CI 0·18-0·81; p=0·012). 12-month overall survival was 79·2% (95% CI 61·1-89·5) in the capecitabine group and 64·2 (95% CI 46·4-77·5) in the gemcitabine group. Median progression-free survival was 12·0 months (95% CI 10·2-14·6) in the capecitabine group and 10·4 months (95% CI 8·9-12·5) in the gemcitabine group (adjusted HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·32-1·12; p=0·11). Eight patients in the capecitabine group had an objective response at 26 weeks, as did seven in the gemcitabine group. More patients in the gemcitabine group than in the capecitabine group had grade 3-4 haematological toxic effects (seven [18%] vs none, p=0·008) and non-haematological toxic effects (ten [26%] vs four [12%], p=0·12) during chemoradiation treatment; the most frequent events were leucopenia, neutropenia, and fatigue. Two patients in the capecitabine group progressed during the fourth cycle of induction chemotherapy. Of the 34 patients in the capecitabine group who received chemoradiotherapy, 25 (74%) received the full protocol dose of radiotherapy, compared with 26 (68%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group. Quality-of-life scores were not significantly different between the treatment groups.InterpretationOur results suggest that a capecitabine-based regimen might be preferable to a gemcitabine-based regimen in the context of consolidation chemoradiotherapy after a course of induction chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution because the difference in the primary endpoint was non-significant and the number of patients in the trial was small.FundingCancer Research UK.
| S-EPMC3620899 | biostudies-literature