Phase I study of third-line palliative chemotherapy with low dose paclitaxel for pancreatic cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Tajima H
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5844031 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Phase I study of third-line palliative chemotherapy with low dose paclitaxel for pancreatic cancer.
Tajima Hidehiro H Okazaki Mitsuyoshi M Yamaguchi Takahisa T Ohbatake Yoshinao Y Okamoto Koichi K Nakanuma Shinichi S Terai Shiro S Sakai Seisho S Kinoshita Jun J Makino Isamu I Nakamura Keishi K Hayashi Hironori H Oyama Katsunobu K Inokuchi Masafumi M Miyashita Tomoharu T Takamura Hiroyuki H Ninomiya Itasu I Fushida Sachio S Ohta Tetsuo T
Molecular and clinical oncology 20180220 4
The prognosis of patients with unresectable or recurrent pancreatic cancers is very poor. Prior to development of nab-paclitaxel (PTX) plus gemcitabine (GEM) therapy and FOLFIRINOX therapy, there was no recommended third-line chemotherapy after 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and GEM-based regimens. The present study conducted a Phase I clinical trial of weekly low-dose PTX as a third-line palliative chemotherapy for patients with pancreatic cancer. PTX was administered on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cy ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Background: The outcome and tolerability of palliative second line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC) in real life patients are largely unknown. Prognostic parameters for risk stratification and treatment guidance are lacking. Materials and Methods: A population based multicenter retrospective cohort study was conducted, covering all APC patients who received palliative second-line chemotherapy between 2011 and 2018 at any cancer center in the South East Region of Sweden. Primary outcome was overall survival after second-line therapy (OS2). Time to treatment failure after second-line therapy (TTF2), hematological toxicity, and unplanned hospitalizations were key secondary outcomes. A number of baseline potentially prognostic parameters were assessed. Results: A total of 509 patients received first-line palliative chemotherapy, and of these 167 (33%) received at least one dose of second-line therapy and formed the final study population. Median OS2 was 5.2 months (95% CI = 4.7-5.7) and median TTF2 was 1.9 months (1.5-2.2). OS2 and TTF2 were similar regardless regimen, including comparison of the two most common regimens (fluoropyrimidine monotherapy vs. fluoropyrimidine/oxaliplatin doublet). Multivariate analysis revealed that normal plasma albumin (≥35) and serum CA-19-9 above median (>1,550) were independent predictors for OS2 (HR = 0.21, p < 0.001 and HR = 2.03, p = 0.009) and TTF2 (HR = 0.22, p < 0.001 and HR = 2.03, p = 0.01), while ECOG performance status >1 was predictive for TTF2 (HR = 2.05, p = 0.032). Grade 3-4 hematological toxicity was registered in 17 patients (10%). 50 (30%) had at least one event of hospitalization. Conclusion: The real world outcome of second line palliative chemotherapy for refractory APC remains dismal. Baseline plasma albumin, serum CA-19-9, and performance status emerge as key prognostic factors, and should be further studied as tools for individualized treatment decisions.
| S-EPMC7397908 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAt diagnosis, more than 80% of patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) suffer from significant weight loss due to malnutrition which is a major concern for patient management, and this may negatively impact treatment outcomes and patient prognosis.Patients and methodsWe performed an observational, retrospective study on patients with metastatic PC (mPC) undergoing first-line chemotherapy with nab-Paclitaxel containing schedules and receiving or not receiving nutritional support (NS) and pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) to investigate their relevance in this setting.ResultsWe observed that PERT and ancillary dietary interventions are related to longer overall survival (OS; median: 16.5 vs. 7.5 months, P < .001) and have a significant, independent, prognostic impact for better outcomes (P = .013), independently from the therapeutic regimen. Furthermore, PERT and NS prevented weight loss during chemotherapy and obtained an improvement of nutritional parameters such as phase angle and free-fat mass index, after 3 months of anticancer treatment. Consistently, the positive impact on OS correlated also with the prevention of Karnofsky performance status deterioration and a lower incidence of maldigestion-related symptoms.ConclusionsOur data suggest that an early and well-conducted NS in patients with mPC may impact on survival and preserve performance status, thus improving quality of life.
| S-EPMC10485404 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThere is increasing recognition of the delicate balance between the modest benefits of palliative chemotherapy and the burden of treatment. Decision aids (DAs) can potentially help patients with advanced cancer with these difficult treatment decisions, but providing detailed information could have an adverse impact on patients' well-being. The objective of this randomised phase II study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of DAs for patients with advanced cancer considering second-line chemotherapy.MethodsPatients with advanced breast or colorectal cancer considering second-line treatment were randomly assigned to usual care (control group) or usual care plus a DA (intervention group) in a 1:2 ratio. A nurse offered a DA with information on adverse events, tumour response and survival. Outcome measures included patient-reported well-being (primary outcome: anxiety) and quality of the decision-making process and the resulting choice.ResultsOf 128 patients randomised, 45 were assigned to the control group and 83 to the intervention group. Median age was 62 years (range 32-81), 63% were female, and 73% had colorectal cancer. The large majority of patients preferred treatment with chemotherapy (87%) and subsequently commenced treatment with chemotherapy (86%). No adverse impact on patients' well-being was found and nurses reported that consultations in which the DAs were offered went well. Being offered the DA was associated with stronger treatment preferences (3.0 vs. 2.5; p=0.030) and increased subjective knowledge (6.7 vs. 6.3; p=0.022). Objective knowledge, risk perception and perceived involvement were comparable between the groups.ConclusionsDAs containing detailed risk information on second-line palliative treatment could be delivered to patients with advanced cancer without having an adverse impact on patient well-being. Surprisingly, the DAs only marginally improved the quality of the decision-making process. The effectiveness of DAs for palliative treatment decisions needs further exploration.Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Registry (NTR): NTR1113 (registered on 2 November 2007).
| S-EPMC5580234 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is growing evidence to suggest that radiotherapy might enhance the efficacy of immunotherapy. This study aimed to assess the possibility of KN046, a bispecific antibody targeting PD-L1 and CTLA-4, combined with chemotherapy and palliative radiotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). In this open-label, phase Ib trial, patients with advanced ESCC were administered chemotherapy with palliative radiotherapy, and KN046 in the predefined escalation dosages of 1, 3, or 5 mg/kg (every 3 weeks during chemotherapy cycles and every 2 weeks during KN046 maintenance). The chemotherapy regimen constituted cisplatin (75 mg/m2 i.v., d1) and paclitaxel (135-175 mg/m2 ivgtt., d1). Radiotherapy specifics, including site, timing, dose, and fragmentation pattern, were at the investigator's discretion. The primary outcome was dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). From May 2019 to April 2021, 25 patients were enrolled across the dosage groups: 3 in 1 mg/kg, 12 in 3 mg/kg, and 10 in 5 mg/kg. No DLT was observed during the dose escalation. The objective response rate was 41.7% (95%CI 22.1-63.4), while the disease control rate was 87.5% (95%CI 67.6-97.3). At a median follow-up of 11.8 months, the median progression-free survival was 7.8 months (95%CI 5.2-9.7) and median overall survival was 15.9 months (95%CI 8.4-NE). Serious adverse events were reported in 48.0% of patients, predominantly leukopenia (16%), immune-mediated enterocolitis (12%), immune-mediated pneumonitis (8%), and neutropenia (8%). Combining KN046 with chemotherapy and palliative radiotherapy might be feasible, showing a favorable safety profile and notable efficacy in advanced ESCC patients.
| S-EPMC11303366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This multicenter phase II study first investigated the efficacy and safety of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) when given every 3 weeks to patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer who had received a prior round of fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy. Patients with unresectable or recurrent gastric cancer who experienced progression despite fluoropyrimidine-containing treatment were studied. Nab-paclitaxel was given i.v. at 260 mg/m(2) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle without anti-allergic premedication until disease progression or study discontinuation. The primary endpoint was the overall response rate. The secondary endpoints were the disease control rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. From April 2008 to July 2010, 56 patients were enrolled, 55 patients received the study treatment, and 54 patients were evaluable for responses. According to an independent review committee, the overall response rate was 27.8% (15/54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 16.5-41.6) and the disease control rate was 59.3% (32/54; 95% CI, 45.0-72.4). One patient had a complete response. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 2.9 months (95% CI, 2.4-3.6) and 9.2 months (95% CI, 6.9-11.4), respectively. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (49.1%), leucopenia (20.0%), lymphopenia (10.9%), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (23.6%). There were no treatment-related deaths. Nab-paclitaxel, given every 3 weeks, showed promising activity against previously treated unresectable or recurrent gastric cancers, with well-tolerated toxicities. (Trial registration, ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00661167).
| S-EPMC4317911 | biostudies-literature
Project description:In this phase II, multicentre trial, patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) were treated with a combination of gemcitabine, epirubicin and paclitaxel (GET). The primary objective of this study was to determine the tolerability and activity in terms of complete responce (CR) and overall response rate of the GET combination in this patient population. Patients with no prior treatment for MBC, and at least one bidimensionally measurable lesion received gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) intravenously (i.v.) over 30 min on days 1 and 4, followed by epirubicin i.v. at 90 mg m(-2) on day 1, and paclitaxel 175 mg m(-2) over 3 h on day 1, every 21 days, up to eight courses. From May 1999 to June 2000, 48 patients were enrolled from seven Italian institutions. A total of 297 chemotherapy courses were administered with a median of six cycles patient(-1) (range 1-8). Seven patients (15%) obtained CR and 27 patients (56%) had partial responce, for an overall response rate of 71% (95% CI: 58.3-83.7). After a median follow-up of 23.7 months (range 7.0-34.4), median progression-free survival was 10.5 months (95% CI: 9.2-11.7), and median overall survival 25.9 months. The main haematological toxicity consisted of grade 3 or 4 neutropenia that occurred in 62% of cycles (22% grade 4 and 40% grade 3). The GET combination is active and well tolerated as first-line chemotherapy for MBC.
| S-EPMC2395340 | biostudies-other
Project description:We conducted an open-label, randomized, two-arm multi-center study to assess the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel versus paclitaxel + sorafenib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer.Patients were randomly assigned to receive either paclitaxel monotherapy (80 mg/m2) weekly (3 weeks on, 1 week off) plus sorafenib 400 mg orally, twice a day taken continuously throughout 28 day cycles. Sorafenib dose was gradually escalated from a starting dose of 200 mg twice a day. The primary endpoint was progression free survival (PFS).A pre-planned efficacy interim analysis was performed on the data of 60 patients, 30 patients in each treatment arm. Median PFS was estimated at 6.6 months (95% CI: 5.1 to 9.0) in patients randomized to single-agent paclitaxel (Arm A) and 5.6 months (95% CI: 3.8 to 6.5) in patients randomized to paclitaxel-sorafenib combination (Arm B) therapy. Contrary to the hypothesis, the treatment effect was statistically significant in favor of paclitaxel monotherapy (hazard ratio 1.80, 95% CI: 1.02 to 3.20; log-rank test P = 0.0409). It was decided to stop the trial early for futility. Median OS was also in favor of Arm A (20.7 months (95% CI: 16.4 to 26.7) versus 12.1 months (95% CI: 5.8 to 20.4) in Arm B. Clinical control was achieved in 28 patients (93.3%) in Arm A and in 21 patients 70.0% in Arm B. Overall response rate was met in 43.3% of patients in Arm A and in 40.0% in Arm B. Toxicities were increased in Arm B with higher rates of diarrhea, nausea, neutropenia, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR) and anorexia, Grad 3 and 4 toxicities were rare.In this pre-planned interim analysis, paclitaxel-sorafenib combination therapy was not found to be superior to paclitaxel monotherapy with regard to the primary end point, progression-free survival. The trial was therefore discontinued early. There was no indication of more favorable outcomes for combination therapy in secondary efficacy end points. As expected, the safety and toxicity profile of the combination therapy was less favorable compared to monotherapy. Overall, this trial did not demonstrate that adding sorafenib to second- or third-line paclitaxel provides any clinical benefit to patients with HER2-negative advanced or metastatic breast cancer. Cautious dosing using a sorafenib ramp up schedule might have contributed to negative results.The study was registered at EudraCT (No 2009-018025-73) and retrospectively registered at Clinical trials.gov on March 17, 2011 ( NCT01320111 ).
| S-EPMC5526236 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Weekly administration of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (nab-paclitaxel) has been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in clinical studies. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, open-label phase II study to compare the efficacy and safety of weekly nab-paclitaxel and docetaxel in Japanese patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative MBC. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Patients were randomized to receive nab-paclitaxel (150 mg/m2 nab-paclitaxel once per week for 3 of 4 weeks; n = 100) or docetaxel (75 mg/m2 docetaxel every 3 weeks; n = 100). The median PFS by independent radiologist assessment was 9.8 months (90% confidence interval [CI]: 8.5-11.2) for nab-paclitaxel and 11.2 months (90% CI: 8.4-13.8) for docetaxel (hazard ratio: 1.25, P = 0.363), and the median overall survival was 42.4 months and 34.0 months, respectively. The overall response rate was 56.1% for nab-paclitaxel and 52.5% for docetaxel. Adverse events in both treatment arms were similar to previous reports. Neutropenia was the most common adverse event in both arms, with 35.0% of patients in the nab-paclitaxel arm and 89.0% in the docetaxel arm experiencing grade 4 neutropenia. Grade 3 peripheral sensory neuropathy occurred in 22.0% of patients in the nab-paclitaxel and 5.0% in the docetaxel arm. In this study, although weekly nab-paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 did not show superiority in PFS compared with docetaxel, efficacy outcomes were similar in patients treated with weekly nab-paclitaxel and docetaxel.
| S-EPMC5448660 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Low-dose metronomic (LDM) paclitaxel therapy displayed a stronger anti-angiogenic activity on breast tumors with fewer side effects. Upregulation of anti-angiogenic factor Thrombospondin-1 (TSP-1) accords for therapeutic potency of LDM paclitaxel, but its molecular mechanism has not been elucidated yet. microRNAs (miRNAs) have emerged as new important regulators of tumor growth and metastasis. Here, we hypothesize that miRNAs are involved in TSP-1 overexpression in paclitaxel LDM therapy of breast tumors. The miRNA profile of tumor tissues from control, LDM and MTD groups in 4T1 mouse breast cancer model was detected by microarray, and then verified by quantitative real-time PCR (qRT-PCR). Luciferase assay and western blot were employed to explore the mechanisms of miRNAs involved in this process. We found that let-7f, let-7a, miR-19b and miR-340-5p were reduced by >2 fold, and miR-543* and miR-684 were upregulated by at least 50% in paclitaxel LDM therapy. qRT-PCR verification revealed that let-7f level was reduced most significantly in LDM therapy. Computational prediction using TargetScan and miRanda suggested THBS1 which encodes TSP-1 as a potential target for let-7f. Luciferase activity assay further confirmed that let-7f may bind to 3'UTR of THBS1 gene and inhibit its activity. Moreover, forced expression of let-7f led to a decrease of TSP-1 at both mRNA and protein levels in MCF-7 cells. Contrastly, let-7f inhibition induced an increased expression of THBS1 mRNA and TSP-1 protein, but did not affect the proliferation and apoptosis of MCF-7 cells. Paclitaxel LDM therapy led to a decrease of let-7f and the elevation of TSP-1 protein expression in MCF-7 cells, while overexpression of let-7f may abolish LDM-induced the upregulation of TSP-1 in MCF-7 cells. In summary, let-7f inhibition contributed to the upregulation of TSP-1 in paclitaxel LDM therapy, independently of proliferation, cell cycle arrest and apoptosis of breast cancer. This study indicates let-7f as a potential therapeutic target for breast tumor.
| S-EPMC4278254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceThe NAPOLI 3 trial showed the superiority of fluorouracil, leucovorin, liposomal irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (NALIRIFOX) over the combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GEM-NABP) as first-line treatment of metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Analyses comparing NALIRIFOX and GEM-NABP with fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) have not yet been reported.ObjectiveTo derive survival, response, and toxic effects data from phase 3 clinical trials and compare NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, and GEM-NABP.Data sourcesAfter a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and American Society of Clinical Oncology and European Society for Medical Oncology meetings' libraries, Kaplan-Meier curves were extracted from phase 3 clinical trials conducted from January 1, 2011, until September 12, 2023.Study selectionPhase 3 clinical trials that tested NALIRIFOX, FOLFIRINOX, or GEM-NABP as first-line treatment of metastatic PDAC and reported overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) curves were selected. This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses of Individual Participant Data reporting guidelines.Data extraction and synthesisIndividual patient OS and PFS data were extracted from Kaplan-Meier plots of original trials via a graphic reconstructive algorithm. Overall response rates (ORRs) and grade 3 or higher toxic effects rates were also collected. A pooled analysis was conducted, and results were validated via a network meta-analysis.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was OS. Secondary outcomes included PFS, ORR, and toxic effects rates.ResultsA total of 7 trials with data on 2581 patients were analyzed, including 383 patients treated with NALIRIFOX, 433 patients treated with FOLFIRINOX, and 1756 patients treated with GEM-NABP. Median PFS was longer in patients treated with NALIRIFOX (7.4 [95% CI, 6.1-7.7] months) or FOLFIRINOX (7.3 [95% CI, 6.5-7.9] months; [HR], 1.21 [95% CI, 0.86-1.70]; P = .28) compared with patients treated with GEM-NABP (5.7 [95% CI, 5.6-6.1] months; HR vs NALIRIFOX, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.22-1.73]; P < .001). Similarly, GEM-NABP was associated with poorer OS (10.4 [95% CI, 9.8-10.8]; months) compared with NALIRIFOX (HR, 1.18 [95% CI, 1.00-1.39]; P = .05], while no difference was observed between FOLFIRINOX (11.7 [95% CI, 10.4-13.0] months) and NALIRIFOX (11.1 [95% CI, 10.1-12.3] months; HR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.81-1.39]; P = .65). There were no statistically significant differences in ORR among NALIRIFOX (41.8%), FOLFIRINOX (31.6%), and GEM-NABP (35.0%). NALIRIFOX was associated with lower incidence of grade 3 or higher hematological toxic effects (eg, platelet count decreased 1.6% vs 11.8% with FOLFIRINOX and 10.8% with GEM-NABP), but higher rates of severe diarrhea compared with GEM-NABP (20.3% vs 15.7%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review and meta-analysis, NALIRIFOX and FOLFIRINOX were associated with similar PFS and OS as first-line treatment of advanced PDAC, although NALIRIFOX was associated with a different toxicity profile. Careful patient selection, financial toxic effects consideration, and direct comparison between FOLFIRINOX and NALIRIFOX are warranted.
| S-EPMC10774994 | biostudies-literature