Targeted therapies in the management of locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Sheahan AV
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5940404 | biostudies-other | 2018 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Publications
Targeted therapies in the management of locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer: a systematic review.
Sheahan Anjali V AV Biankin Andrew V AV Parish Christopher R CR Khachigian Levon M LM
Oncotarget 20180420 30
Pancreatic cancer has a dismal prognosis particularly in patients presenting with unresectable tumors. We performed a bibliometric analysis of clinical trials for pancreatic cancer conducted between 2014-2016 focusing on patients that presented with unresectable (locally advanced or metastatic) tumors. We discuss a range of studies that employed FOLFIRINOX, the gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel combination and studies that used molecularly-targeted therapy. Major areas of focus have been dual targeti ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Pancreatic cancer is typically characterized by its aggressive tumor growth and dismal prognosis. Approximately 30% of patients with pancreatic cancer present with locally advanced disease, broadly defined as having a tumor-to-artery interface >180°, having an unreconstructable portal vein or superior mesenteric vein and no signs of metastatic disease. These patients are currently designated to palliative systemic chemotherapy, though median overall survival remains poor (approximately 11 months). Therefore, several innovative local therapies have been investigated as new treatment options for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). This article provides an overview of available data with regard to morbidity and oncological outcome of novel local therapies for LAPC.
| S-EPMC5789366 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Ablative techniques provide in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) symptomatic relief, survival benefit and potential downsizing. Irreversible Electroporation (IRE) represents potentially an ideal solution as no thermal tissue damage occurs. The purpose of this review is to present an overview on safety, feasibility, oncological results, survival and quality of life improvement obtained by IRE. METHODS:A systematic search was performed in PubMed, regarding the use of IRE on PC in humans for studies published in English up to March 2019. RESULTS:15 original studies embodying 691 patients with unresectable LAPC who underwent IRE were included. As emerged, IRE works better on tumour sizes between 3-4 cm. Oncological results are promising: median OS from diagnosis or treatment up to 27 months. Two groups investigated borderline resectable tumours treated with IRE before resection with margin attenuation, whereas IRE has proved to be effective in pain control. CONCLUSIONS:Electroporation is bringing new hopes in LAPC management. The first aim of IRE is to offer a palliative treatment. Further efforts are needed for patient selection, as well as the use of IRE for 'margin accentuation' during surgical resection. Even if promising, IRE needs to be validated in large, randomized, prospective series.
| S-EPMC6896066 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal malignant tumor types, being the sixth leading cause of mortality worldwide and the fourth in Europe. Globally, it has a mortality/incidence ratio of 98%, and the 5‑year survival rate in Europe is only 3%. Although risk factors, such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, smoking, alcohol consumption and genetic factors, have been identified, the causes of PDAC remain elusive. Additionally, the only curative treatment for PDAC is surgery with negative margins. However, upon diagnosis, ~30% of the patients already present with locally advanced disease. In these cases, a multidisciplinary approach is required to improve disease‑related symptoms and prolong patient survival. In the present article, a comprehensive review of PDAC epidemiology, physiology and treatment is provided. Moreover, guidelines on patient treatment are suggested. Among the different available therapeutic options for the treatment of advanced PDAC, results are modest, most likely due to the complexity of the disease, and so the prognostic remains poor. Molecular approaches based on multi‑omics research are promising and will contribute to groundbreaking personalized medicine. Thus, economic investment that promotes research of pancreatic cancer will be critical to the development of more efficient diagnostic and treatment strategies.
| S-EPMC8651228 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is no consensus on the management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer, with either chemotherapy or combined modality approaches being employed (Maheshwari and Moser, 2005). No published meta-analysis (Fung et al, 2003; Banu et al, 2005; Liang, 2005; Bria et al, 2006; Milella et al, 2006) has included randomised controlled trials employing radiation therapy. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the following: (i) chemoradiation followed by chemotherapy (combined modality therapy) vs best supportive care (ii) radiotherapy vs chemoradiation (iii) radiotherapy vs combined modality therapy (iv) chemotherapy vs combined modality therapy (v) 5FU-based combined modality treatment vs another-agent-based combined modality therapy. Relevant randomised controlled trials were identified by searching databases, trial registers and conference proceedings. The primary end point was overall survival and secondary end points were progression-free survival/time-to-progression, response rate and adverse events. Survival data were summarised using hazard ratio (HR) and response-rate/adverse-event data with relative risk. Eleven trials involving 794 patients met the inclusion criteria. Length of survival with chemoradiation was increased compared with radiotherapy alone (two trials, 168 patients, HR 0.69; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.51-0.94), but chemoradiation followed by chemotherapy did not lead to a survival advantage over chemotherapy alone (two trials, 134 patients, HR 0.79; CI 0.32-1.95). Meta-analyses could not be performed for the other comparisons. A survival benefit was demonstrated for chemoradiation over radiotherapy alone. Chemoradiation followed by chemotherapy did not demonstrate any survival advantage over chemotherapy alone, but important clinical differences cannot be ruled out due to the wide CI.
| S-EPMC2360143 | biostudies-other
Project description:35% of patients with pancreatic cancer have unresectable locally advanced disease at diagnosis. Several studies have examined systemic chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin) in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. We aimed to assess the effectiveness of FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment in this patient population.We systematically searched Embase, MEDLINE (OvidSP), Web of Science, Scopus, PubMed Publisher, Cochrane, and Google Scholar from July 1, 1994, to July 2, 2015, for studies of treatment-naive patients of any age who received FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Our primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were progression-free survival; rates of grade 3 or 4 adverse events; and the proportion of patients who underwent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, surgical resection after FOLFIRINOX, and R0 resection. We evaluated survival outcomes with the Kaplan-Meier method with patient-level data. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events, and the proportion of patients who underwent subsequent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or resection, were pooled in a random-effects model.We included 13 studies comprising 689 patients, of whom 355 (52%) patients had locally advanced pancreatic cancer. 11 studies, comprising 315 patients with locally advanced disease, reported survival outcomes and were eligible for patient-level meta-analysis. Median overall survival from the start of FOLFIRINOX ranged from 10·0 months (95% CI 4·0-16·0) to 32·7 months (23·1-42·3) across studies with a pooled patient-level median overall survival of 24·2 months (95% CI 21·7-26·8). Median progression-free survival ranged from 3·0 months (95% CI not calculable) to 20·4 months (6·5-34·3) across studies with a patient-level median progression-free survival of 15·0 months (95% 13·8-16·2). In ten studies comprising 490 patients, 296 grade 3 or 4 adverse events were reported (60·4 events per 100 patients). No deaths were attributed to FOLFIRINOX toxicity. The proportion of patients who underwent radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy ranged from 31% to 100% across studies. In eight studies, 154 (57%) of 271 patients received radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy after FOLFIRINOX. The pooled proportion of patients who received any radiotherapy treatment was 63·5% (95% CI 43·3-81·6, I(2) 90%). The proportion of patients who underwent surgical resection for locally advanced pancreatic cancer ranged from 0% to 43%. The proportion of patients who had R0 resection of those who underwent resection ranged from 50% to 100% across studies. In 12 studies, 91 (28%) of 325 patients underwent resection after FOLFIRINOX. The pooled proportion of patients who had resection was 25·9% (95% CI 20·2-31·9, I(2) 24%). R0 resection was reported in 60 (74%) of 81 patients. The pooled proportion of patients who had R0 resection was 78·4% (95% CI 60·2-92·2, I(2) 64%).Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX had a median overall survival of 24·2 months-longer than that reported with gemcitabine (6-13 months). Future research should assess these promising results in a randomised controlled trial, and should establish which patients might benefit from radiotherapy or chemoradiotherapy or resection after FOLFIRINOX.None.
| S-EPMC5527756 | biostudies-literature
Project description:With increasing treatment options available, the management of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancer (PCa) is growing more complex, nuanced, and individualized. Strategies for combining surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, and androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) continue to evolve, as do ADT and immunotherapy options. Additionally, multiple adjunctive agents for metastatic PCa have been recently approved or are pending approval. As the number of locally advanced and metastatic prostate cancers being diagnosed rises, so does the need to consider patients' clinical situations and personal preferences. This review discusses current and potential future approaches to managing locally advanced and metastatic PCa.
| S-EPMC7672503 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundRecent advances in targeted therapies have raised expectations that the clinical application of biomarkers would improve patient's health outcomes and potentially save costs. However, the cost-effectiveness of biomarkers remains unclear irrespective of the cost-effectiveness of corresponding therapies. It is thus important to determine whether biomarkers for targeted therapies provide good value for money. This study systematically reviews economic evaluations of biomarkers for targeted therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and assesses the cost-effectiveness of predictive biomarkers in mCRC.MethodsA literature search was performed using Medline, Embase, EconLit, NHSEED. Papers published from 2000 until June 2018 were searched. All economic evaluations assessing biomarker-guided therapies with companion diagnostics in mCRC were searched. To make studies more comparable, cost-effectiveness results were synthesized as per biomarker tests and corresponding therapies. Methodological quality was assessed using the Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) instrument.ResultsForty-six studies were included in this review. Of these, 17 studies evaluated the intrinsic value of cancer biomarkers, whereas the remaining studies focused on assessing the cost-effectiveness of corresponding drugs. Most studies indicated favourable cost-effectiveness of biomarkers for targeted therapies in mCRC. Some studies reported that biomarkers were cost-effective, while their corresponding therapies were not cost-effective. A considerable number of economic evaluations were conducted in pre-defined genetic populations and thus, often failed to fully capture the biomarker's clinical and economic values. The average QHES score was 73.6.ConclusionCancer biomarkers for targeted therapies in mCRC were mostly found to be cost-effective; otherwise, they at least improved the cost-effectiveness of targeted therapies by saving some costs. However, this did not necessarily make their corresponding therapies cost-effective. While companion biomarkers reduced therapy costs, the savings were not sufficient to make the corresponding agents cost-effective. Evaluation of biomarkers was often restricted to the cost of tests and did not consider their clinical values or biomarker prevalence.
| S-EPMC6157891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare the effectiveness and safety of treatments for advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (amRCC) after treatment with vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF)-targeted treatment.DesignSystematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and comparative observational studies. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched up to January 2018.ParticipantsPeople with amRCC requiring treatment after VEGF-targeted treatment.InterventionsAxitinib, cabozantinib, everolimus, lenvatinib with everolimus, nivolumab, sorafenib and best supportive care (BSC).OutcomesPrimary outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS); secondary outcomes were objective response rate (ORR), adverse events, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL).ResultsTwelve studies were included (n=5144): five RCTs and seven observational studies. Lenvatinib with everolimus significantly increased OS and PFS over everolimus (HR 0.61, 95% Credible Interval [95%CrI]: 0.36 to 0.96 and 0.47, 95%CrI: 0.26 to 0.77, respectively) as did cabozantinib (HR 0.66, 95%CrI: 0.53 to 0.82 and 0.51, 95%CrI: 0.41 to 0.63, respectively). This remained the case when observational evidence was included. Nivolumab also significantly improved OS versus everolimus (HR 0.74, 95%CrI: 0.57 to 0.93). OS sensitivity analysis, including observational studies, indicates everolimus being more effective than axitinib and sorafenib. However, inconsistency was identified in the OS sensitivity analysis. PFS sensitivity analysis suggests axitinib is more effective than everolimus, which may be more effective than sorafenib. The results for ORR supported the OS and PFS analyses. Nivolumab is associated with fewer grade 3 or grade 4 adverse events than lenvatinib with everolimus or cabozantinib. HRQoL could not be analysed due to differences in tools used.ConclusionsLenvatinib with everolimus, cabozantinib and nivolumab are effective in prolonging the survival for people with amRCC subsequent to VEGF-targeted treatment, but there is considerable uncertainty about how they compare to each other and how much better they are than axitinib and sorafenib.Prospero registration numberCRD42017071540.
| S-EPMC6429896 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundSurvival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has been significantly improved with the introduction of the monoclonal antibodies targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). Novel molecular-targeted agents such as aflibercept and regorafenib have recently been approved. The aim of this review is to summarize and assess the effects of molecular agents in mCRC based on the available phase II and III trials, pooled analyses, and meta-analyses/systematic reviews.MethodsA systematic literature search was conducted using the meta-database of the German Institute of Medical Documentation and Information. Criteria of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network were used to assess the quality of the controlled trials and systematic reviews/meta-analyses.ResultsOf the 806 retrieved records, 40 publications were included. For bevacizumab, efficacy in combination with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in first- and subsequent-line settings has been shown. The benefit of continued VEGF targeting has also been demonstrated with aflibercept and regorafenib. Cetuximab is effective with fluoropyrimidine, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) in first-line settings and as a single agent in last-line settings. Efficacy for panitumumab has been shown with oxaliplatin with fluoropyrimidine in first-line settings, with FOLFIRI in second-line settings, and as monotherapy in last-line settings. Treatment of anti-EGFR antibodies is restricted to patients with tumors that do not harbor mutations in Kirsten rat sarcoma and in neuroblastoma RAS.ConclusionAmong various therapeutic options, the future challenge will be a better selection of the population that will benefit the most from specific anti-VEGF or anti- EGFR treatment and a careful consideration of therapy sequence.
| S-EPMC4221380 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Urothelial carcinoma remains a devastating disease with a poor prognosis. Though immune therapy with Bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) has been used for localized bladder cancer for years, only immune-checkpoint blockade with antiprogrammed cell-death 1 (anti-PD-1) and antiprogrammed cell-death ligand 1 (anti-PD-L1) inhibitors have demonstrated improvement in survival of patients with metastatic disease. Anti-PD-L1 antibody, avelumab, was recently given United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) accelerated approval for the treatment of recurrent/metastatic urothelial carcinoma after failure of first-line chemotherapy, marking the fifth immune checkpoint inhibitor to be given FDA approval for the treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer. The following manuscript will review avelumab, its pharmacology, and the clinical experience that has led to its approval, as well as future plans for clinical development of avelumab for the treatment or urothelial cancer.
| S-EPMC6354303 | biostudies-literature