Regional chemotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: RECLAP trial

Jeremy L Davis, Prakash Pandalai, R Taylor Ripley, Russell C Langan, Seth M Steinberg, Melissa Walker, Mary Ann Toomey, Elliot Levy, Itzhak Avital, Jeremy L Davis, Prakash Pandalai, R Taylor Ripley, Russell C Langan, Seth M Steinberg, Melissa Walker, Mary Ann Toomey, Elliot Levy, Itzhak Avital

Abstract

Background: Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in the United States. Surgery offers the only chance for cure. However, less than twenty percent of patients are considered operative candidates at the time of diagnosis. A common reason for being classified as unresectable is advanced loco-regional disease.A review of the literature indicates that almost nine hundred patients with pancreatic cancer have received regional chemotherapy in the last 15 years. Phase I studies have shown regional administration of chemotherapy to be safe. The average reported response rate was approximately 26%. The average 1-year survival was 39%, with an average median survival of 9 months. Of the patients that experienced a radiographic response to therapy, 78 (78/277, 28%) patients underwent exploratory surgery following regional chemotherapy administration; thirty-two (41%) of those patients were amenable to pancreatectomy. None of the studies performed analyses to identify factors predicting response to regional chemotherapy.Progressive surgical techniques combined with current neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy strategies have already yielded emerging support for a multimodality approach to treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.Intravenous gemcitabine is the current standard treatment of pancreatic cancer. However, >90% of the drug is secreted unchanged affecting toxicity but not the cancer per se. Gemcitabine is converted inside the cell into its active drug form in a rate limiting reaction. We hypothesize that neoadjuvant regional chemotherapy with continuous infusion of gemcitabine will be well tolerated and may improve resectability rates in cases of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Design: This is a phase I study designed to evaluate the feasibility and toxicity of super-selective intra-arterial administration of gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Patients considered unresectable due to locally advanced pancreatic cancer will receive super-selective arterial infusion of gemcitabine over 24 hours via subcutaneous indwelling port. Three to six patients will be enrolled per dose cohort, with seven cohorts, plus an additional six patients at the maximum tolerated dose; accrual is expected to last 36 months. Secondary objectives will include the determination of progression free and overall survival, as well as the conversion rate from unresectable to potentially resectable pancreatic cancer.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01294358.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
RECLAP Trial Schema, Cohort 1. C1 W1 dl1 = Cycle 1, Week 1, dose level 1; C1W3 dl1 = Cycle 1, Week 3, dose level 1, etc.; DLT, dose limiting toxicity; PD, progressive disease; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; CR, partial response; RECIST, Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors; Subsequent cohorts will follow the same schema of treatment courses.

References

    1. Jemal A, Siegel R, Xu J, Ward E. Cancer statistics. CA: a cancer journal for clinicians. 2010;60:277–300. doi: 10.3322/caac.20073. 2010.
    1. Sener SF, Fremgen A, Menck HR, Winchester DP. Pancreatic cancer: a report of treatment and survival trends for 100,313 patients diagnosed from 1985-1995, using the National Cancer Database. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;189:1–7. doi: 10.1016/S1072-7515(99)00075-7.
    1. Oettle H, Post S, Neuhaus P, Gellert K, Langrehr J, Ridwelski K, Schramm H, Fahlke J, Zuelke C, Burkart C. et al.Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine vs observation in patients undergoing curative-intent resection of pancreatic cancer: a randomized controlled trial. Jama. 2007;297:267–277. doi: 10.1001/jama.297.3.267.
    1. Yip D, Karapetis C, Strickland A, Steer CB, Goldstein D. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for inoperable advanced pancreatic cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;3:CD002093.
    1. Collins JM. Pharmacologic rationale for regional drug delivery. J Clin Oncol. 1984;2:498–504.
    1. Creech O Jr, Krementz ET, Ryan RF, Winblad JN. Chemotherapy of cancer: regional perfusion utilizing an extracorporeal circuit. Ann Surg. 1958;148:616–632. doi: 10.1097/00000658-195810000-00009.
    1. Cornett WR, McCall LM, Petersen RP, Ross MI, Briele HA, Noyes RD, Sussman JJ, Kraybill WG, Kane JM, Alexander HR. et al.Randomized multicenter trial of hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion with melphalan alone compared with melphalan plus tumor necrosis factor: American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0020. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4196–4201. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.05.5152.
    1. Park BJ, Alexander HR, Libutti SK, Wu P, Royalty D, Kranda KC, Bartlett DL. Treatment of primary peritoneal mesothelioma by continuous hyperthermic peritoneal perfusion (CHPP) Ann Surg Oncol. 1999;6:582–590. doi: 10.1007/s10434-999-0582-6.
    1. Markman M, Bundy BN, Alberts DS, Fowler JM, Clark-Pearson DL, Carson LF, Wadler S, Sickel J. Phase III trial of standard-dose intravenous cisplatin plus paclitaxel versus moderately high-dose carboplatin followed by intravenous paclitaxel and intraperitoneal cisplatin in small-volume stage III ovarian carcinoma: an intergroup study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group, Southwestern Oncology Group, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1001–1007.
    1. DeAngelis LM, Boutros D. Leptomeningeal metastasis. Cancer Invest. 2005;23:145–154.
    1. Wu WJ, Ke HL, Yang YH, Li CC, Chou YH, Huang CH. Should patients with primary upper urinary tract cancer receive prophylactic intravesical chemotherapy after nephroureterectomy? J Urol. pp. 56–61.
    1. Abbruzzese JL, Grunewald R, Weeks EA, Gravel D, Adams T, Nowak B, Mineishi S, Tarassoff P, Satterlee W, Raber MN. et al.A phase I clinical, plasma, and cellular pharmacology study of gemcitabine. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9:491–498.
    1. Tempero M, Plunkett W, Ruiz Van Haperen V, Hainsworth J, Hochster H, Lenzi R, Abbruzzese J. Randomized phase II comparison of dose-intense gemcitabine: thirty-minute infusion and fixed dose rate infusion in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:3402–3408. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.09.140.
    1. Tempero M, Arnoletti JP, Ben-Josef E, Bhargava P, Casper ES, Kim P, Malafa MP, Nakakura EK, Shibata S, Talamonti M. et al.Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2007;5:998–1033.
    1. Anderson H, Thatcher N, Walling J, Hansen H. A phase I study of a 24 hour infusion of gemcitabine in previously untreated patients with inoperable non-small-cell lung cancer. Br J Cancer. 1996;74:460–462. doi: 10.1038/bjc.1996.382.
    1. Rajdev L, Goldberg G, Hopkins U, Sparano JA. A phase I trial of gemcitabine administered as a 96-h continuous intravenous infusion in patients with advanced carcinoma and lymphoma. Med Oncol. 2006;23:369–376. doi: 10.1385/MO:23:3:369.
    1. Varadhachary GR, Tamm EP, Abbruzzese JL, Xiong HQ, Crane CH, Wang H, Lee JE, Pisters PW, Evans DB, Wolff RA. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: definitions, management, and role of preoperative therapy. Annals of surgical oncology. 2006;13:1035–1046. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2006.08.011.
    1. Homma H, Doi T, Mezawa S, Takada K, Kukitsu T, Oku T, Akiyama T, Kusakabe T, Miyanishi K, Niitsu Y. A novel arterial infusion chemotherapy for the treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic carcinoma after vascular supply distribution via superselective embolization. Cancer. 2000;89:303–313. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(20000715)89:2<303::AID-CNCR15>;2-1.
    1. Miyanishi K, Ishiwatari H, Hayashi T, Takahashi M, Kawano Y, Takada K, Ihara H, Okuda T, Takanashi K, Takanashi S. et al.A Phase I trial of arterial infusion chemotherapy with gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil for unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer after vascular supply distribution via superselective embolization. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2008;38:268–274. doi: 10.1093/jjco/hyn015.
    1. Bruix J, Sherman M, Llovet JM, Beaugrand M, Lencioni R, Burroughs AK, Christensen E, Pagliaro L, Colombo M, Rodes J. Clinical management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Conclusions of the Barcelona-2000 EASL conference. European Association for the Study of the Liver. Journal of hepatology. 2001;35:421–430. doi: 10.1016/S0168-8278(01)00130-1.
    1. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, Glabbeke Van M, Oosterom van AT, Christian MC. et al.New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2000;92:205–216. doi: 10.1093/jnci/92.3.205.
    1. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, Figer A, Hecht JR, Gallinger S, Au HJ, Murawa P, Walde D, Wolff RA. et al.Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1960–1966. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2006.07.9525.
    1. Poplin E, Feng Y, Berlin J, Rothenberg ML, Hochster H, Mitchell E, Alberts S, O'Dwyer P, Haller D, Catalano P. et al.Phase III, randomized study of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin versus gemcitabine (fixed-dose rate infusion) compared with gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) in patients with pancreatic carcinoma E6201: a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:3778–3785. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.9007.

Source: PubMed

3
Suscribir