Positron emission tomography response evaluation from a randomized phase III trial of weekly nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas

R K Ramanathan, D Goldstein, R L Korn, F Arena, M Moore, S Siena, L Teixeira, J Tabernero, J-L Van Laethem, H Liu, D McGovern, B Lu, D D Von Hoff, R K Ramanathan, D Goldstein, R L Korn, F Arena, M Moore, S Siena, L Teixeira, J Tabernero, J-L Van Laethem, H Liu, D McGovern, B Lu, D D Von Hoff

Abstract

Background: In the phase III MPACT trial, nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (nab-P + Gem) demonstrated superior efficacy versus Gem alone for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. We sought to examine the feasibility of positron emission tomography (PET) and to compare metabolic response rates and associated correlations with efficacy in the MPACT trial.

Patients and methods: Patients with previously untreated metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomized 1:1 to receive nab-P + Gem or Gem alone. Treatment continued until disease progression by RECIST or unacceptable toxicity.

Results: PET scans were carried out on the first 257 patients enrolled at PET-equipped centers (PET cohort). Most patients (252 of 257) had ≥2 PET-avid lesions, and median maximum standardized uptake values at baseline were 4.6 and 4.5 in the nab-P + Gem and Gem-alone arms, respectively. In a pooled treatment arm analysis, a metabolic response by PET (best response at any time during study) was associated with longer overall survival (OS) (median 11.3 versus 6.9 months; HR, 0.56; P < 0.001). Efficacy results within each treatment arm appeared better for patients with a metabolic response. The metabolic response rate (best response and week 8 response) was higher for nab-P + Gem (best response: 72% versus 53%, P = 0.002; week 8: 67% versus 51%; P = 0.014). Efficacy in the PET cohort was greater for nab-P + Gem versus Gem alone, including for OS (median 10.5 versus 8.4 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; P = 0.009) and ORR by RECIST (31% versus 11%; P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Pancreatic lesions were PET avid at baseline, and the rate of metabolic response was significantly higher for nab-P + Gem versus Gem alone at week 8 and for best response during study. Having a metabolic response was associated with longer survival, and more patients experienced a metabolic response than a RECIST-defined response.

Clinicaltrialsgov: NCT00844649.

Keywords: gemcitabine; metabolic response; nab-paclitaxel; pancreatic cancer; positron emission tomography.

© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flow diagram of patients who received PET scans. Gem, gemcitabine; ITT, intent-to-treat; nab-P, nab-paclitaxel; PET, positron emission tomography.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Overall survival in each treatment arm based on metabolic response. Gem, gemcitabine; MR, metabolic response; nab-P, nab-paclitaxel; NMR, no metabolic response.

References

    1. American Cancer Society, ed. Cancer Facts and Figures 2015. Atlanta: American Cancer Society; 2015; No. 2015.
    1. Wood KA, Hoskin PJ, Saunders MI. Positron emission tomography in oncology: a review. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol) 2007; 19(4): 237–255.
    1. Selzner M, Hany TF, Wildbrett P et al. . Does the novel PET/CT imaging modality impact on the treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer of the liver? Ann Surg 2004; 240(6): 1027–1034; discussion 1035–6.
    1. Borst GR, Belderbos JS, Boellaard R et al. . Standardised FDG uptake: a prognostic factor for inoperable non-small cell lung cancer. Eur J Cancer 2005; 41(11): 1533–1541.
    1. Reske SN, Grillenberger KG, Glatting G et al. . Overexpression of glucose transporter 1 and increased FDG uptake in pancreatic carcinoma. J Nucl Med 1997; 38(9): 1344–1348.
    1. Young H, Baum R, Cremerius U et al. . Measurement of clinical and subclinical tumour response using [18F]-fluorodeoxyglucose and positron emission tomography: review and 1999 EORTC recommendations. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) PET study group. Eur J Cancer 1999; 35(13): 1773–1782.
    1. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, ed. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Pancreatic Adeocarcinoma, Version 2.2014. 1.2014th edition The National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2014. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network, ed. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology; No. 2014.
    1. Eschmann SM, Friedel G, Paulsen F et al. . Is standardised (18)F-FDG uptake value an outcome predictor in patients with stage III non-small cell lung cancer? Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2006; 33(3): 263–269.
    1. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J et al. . New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009; 45(2): 228–247.
    1. Piessevaux H, Buyse M, Schlichting M et al. . Use of early tumor shrinkage to predict long-term outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. J Clin Oncol 2013; 31(30): 3764–3775.
    1. Ott K, Herrmann K, Lordick F et al. . Early metabolic response evaluation by fluorine-18 fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography allows in vivo testing of chemosensitivity in gastric cancer: long-term results of a prospective study. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14(7): 2012–2018.
    1. Haioun C, Itti E, Rahmouni A et al. . [18F]fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (FDG-PET) in aggressive lymphoma: an early prognostic tool for predicting patient outcome. Blood 2005; 106(4): 1376–1381.
    1. Antoch G, Kanja J, Bauer S et al. . Comparison of PET, CT, and dual-modality PET/CT imaging for monitoring of imatinib (STI571) therapy in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Nucl Med 2004; 45(3): 357–365.
    1. Choi H, Charnsangavej C, de Castro Faria S et al. . CT evaluation of the response of gastrointestinal stromal tumors after imatinib mesylate treatment: a quantitative analysis correlated with FDG PET findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004; 183(6): 1619–1628.
    1. Choi HJ, Kang CM, Lee WJ et al. . Prognostic value of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. Yonsei Med J 2013; 54(6): 1377–1383.
    1. Von Hoff DD, Ramanathan RK, Borad MJ et al. . Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel is an active regimen in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase I/II trial. J Clin Oncol 2011; 29(34): 4548–4554.
    1. Goldstein D, El-Maraghi RH, Hammel P et al. . Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: long-term survival from a phase III trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107(2): .
    1. Von Hoff DD, Ervin T, Arena FP et al. . Increased survival in pancreatic cancer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. N Engl J Med 2013; 369(18): 1691–1703.
    1. Prior JO, Montemurro M, Orcurto MV et al. . Early prediction of response to sunitinib after imatinib failure by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(3): 439–445.
    1. Wu AJ, Goodman KA. Positron emission tomography imaging for gastroesophageal junction tumors. Semin Radiat Oncol 2013; 23(1): 10–15.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe