Phase II trial of oral S-1 combined with gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic cancer

We conducted a phase II trial of gemcitabine with S-1, oral fluorouracil (5-FU) prodrug tegafur combined with two modulators, 5-chloro-2, 4-dihydroxypyridine and potassium oxonate, to evaluate the activity and toxicity of such a combination in metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) patients. Patients who had pathologically proven pancreatic cancer with metastatic lesions were eligible candidates for entry into the study. S-1 was given orally (30 mg m−2) b.i.d. for 14 consecutive days and gemcitabine (1000 mg m−2) was given on days 8 and 15. The cycle was repeated every 21 days. We enrolled 33 MPC patients. The median number of cycles was eight (range 1–20). Grade 3–4 toxicities were leucopenia (33%), neutropenia (55%), anaemia (9%), thrombocytopenia (15%), anorexia (6%), fever (9%), and interstitial pneumonia (6%). Objective responses were obtained in 16 patients (one complete response and 15 partial responses; response rate, 48%; 95% confidence interval (CI), 33–65). Median survival and 1-year survival rate were 12.5 months (95% CI, 5.9–19.1) and 54% (95% CI, 36–72), respectively. Combination chemotherapy with GEM and S-1 was well tolerated and yielded a significantly high response rate

Cyclopentenyl cytosine increases gemcitabine radiosensitisation in human pancreatic cancer cells

The deoxycytidine analogue 2′,2′-difluoro-2′-deoxycytidine (dFdC, gemcitabine) is a potent radiosensitiser, but has limited efficacy in combination with radiotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer due to acute toxicity. We investigated whether cyclopentenyl cytosine (CPEC), targetting the ‘de novo' biosynthesis of cytidine triphosphate (CTP), could increase dFdC cytotoxicity alone or in combination with irradiation in a panel of human pancreatic cancer cells (Panc-1, Miapaca-2, BxPC-3). To investigate the role of deoxycytidine kinase (dCK), the rate-limiting enzyme in the activation of dFdC, human lung cancer cells without (dFdC-resistant SWg) and with an intact dCK gene (dFdC-sensitive SWp) were included. We found that CPEC (100–1000 nmol l−1) specifically reduced CTP levels in a dose-dependent manner that lasted up to 72 h in all cell lines. Preincubation with CPEC resulted in a dose-dependent increase in dFdC incorporated into the DNA only in dFdC-sensitive cells. Consequently, CPEC increased the effectiveness of dFdC (300 nmol l−1 for 4 h) only in dFdC-sensitive cells, which was accompanied by an increase in apoptosis. We also found that CPEC enhanced the radiosensitivity of cells treated with dFdC (30–300 nmol l−1 for 4 h). These results indicate that CPEC enhances the cytotoxicity of dFdC alone and in combination with irradiation in several human tumour cell lines with an intact dCK gene

Irinotecan plus raltitrexed vs raltitrexed alone in patients with gemcitabine-pretreated advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma

There is no established second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine failure. In view of the urgent need for such therapy, and since preclinical and phase I clinical data suggest an encouraging, potentially synergistic activity between raltitrexed and irinotecan, the present randomised phase II study was initiated. A total of 38 patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, who progressed while receiving or within 6 months after discontinuation of palliative first-line chemotherapy with gemcitabine, were enrolled in this study. They were randomised to 3-weekly courses of raltitrexed 3 mg m−2 on day 1 (arm A) or irinotecan 200 mg m−2 on day 1 plus raltitrexed 3 mg m−2 on day 2 (arm B). The primary study end point was objective response, secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS), as well as clinical benefit response in symptomatic patients (n=28). In the combination arm, the IRC-confirmed objective response rate was 16% (three out of 19 patients had a partial remission; 95% CI, 3–40%), which was clearly superior to that in the comparator/control arm with raltitrexed alone, in which no response was obtained. Therefore, the trial was already stopped at the first stage of accrual. Also, the secondary study end points, median PFS (2.5 vs 4.0 months), OS (4.3 vs 6.5 months), and clinical benefit response (8 vs 29%) were superior in the combination arm. The objective and subjective benefits of raltitrexed+irinotecan were not negated by severe, clinically relevant treatment-related toxicities: gastrointestinal symptoms (42 vs 68%), partial alopecia (0 vs 42%), and cholinergic syndrome (0 vs 21%) were more commonly noted in arm B; however, grade 3 adverse events occurred in only three patients in both treatment groups. Our data indicate that combined raltitrexed+irinotecan seems to be an effective salvage regimen in patients with gemcitabine-pretreated pancreatic cancer. The superior response activity, PFS and OS (when compared to raltitrexed), as well as its tolerability and ease of administration suggest that future trials with this combination are warranted

Gene expression profiling may improve diagnosis in patients with carcinoma of unknown primary

Carcinomas of unknown primary (CUP) represent between 3 and 10% of malignancies. Treatment with nonspecific chemotherapy is commonly unhelpful and the median survival is between 3 and 6 months. Gene expression microarray (GEM) analysis has demonstrated that molecular signatures can aid in tumour classification and propose foster primaries. In this study, we demonstrate the clinical utility of a diagnostic gene expression profiling tool and discuss its potential implications for patient management strategies. Paraffin tumour samples from 21 cases of ‘true' CUP patients in whom standard investigation had failed to determine a primary site of malignancy were investigated using diagnostic gene profiling. The results were reviewed in the context of histology and clinical history. Classification of tumour origin using the GEM method confirmed the clinicians' suspicion in 16 out of 21 cases. There was a clinical/GEM inconsistency in 4 out of 21 patients and a pathological/GEM inconsistency in 1 patient. The improved diagnoses by the GEM method would have influenced the management in 12 out of 21 cases. Genomic profiling and cancer classification tools represent a promising analytical approach to assist with the management of CUP patients. We propose that GEM diagnosis be considered when the primary clinical algorithm has failed to provide a diagnosis

Phase-I trial of oral fluoropyrimidine anticancer agent (S-1) with concurrent radiotherapy in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer

In this phase-I trial, we evaluated the safety of S-1, a novel oral fluoropyrimidine anticancer agent, combined with external-beam radiotherapy (EBRT) to determine the maximum-tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in unresectable pancreatic cancer patients. Patients had histologically proven unresectable locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. S-1 was administered orally twice daily. External-beam radiotherapy was delivered in fractions of 1.25 Gy × 2 per day, totalling 50 Gy per 40 fractions for 4 weeks. S-1 was given at five dose levels: 60 mg m–2 day–1 on days 1–7 and 15–21 (level 1), 1–14 (level 2), and 1–21 (level 3a) and 80 mg m–2 day–1 on days 1–21 (level 3b) and 1–28 (level 4). We studied 17 patients: dose levels 1 (four patients), 2 (four patients), 3a (three patients), 3b (three patients), and 4 (three patients). One patient in level 1 (grade 3 vomiting) and two patients in level 4 (grade 4 neutropenia and grade 3 anorexia) showed DLT. No DLT was seen for levels 2, 3a, and 3b. Clinical effects by computed tomography included 5 partial responses (35%), 11 cases of stable disease, and one case of progressive disease. CA19–9 levels of less than half the starting values were observed in 8 of 16 (50%) patients. S-1 at a dose of 80 mg m–2 day–1 given on days 1–21 is safe and recommended for phase-II study in patients with locally advanced and unresectable pancreatic cancer when given with EBRT

Phase I trial of oral S-1 combined with gemcitabine in metastatic pancreatic cancer

The objective of this study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of S-1, an oral fluorouracil derivative, combined with gemcitabine, the current standard treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). The subjects were histopathologically proven APC patients with distant metastasis. S-1 was administered orally twice daily each day for 14 days and gemcitabine on days 8 and 15 of each cycle, and this was repeated every 21 days. Doses of each drug were planned as follows: level 1: 800/60, level 2a: 800/80, level 2b: 1000/60, level 3: 1000/80 (gemcitabine (mg m−2)/S-1 (mg m−2 day−1)). In all, 21 patients with APC were enrolled. The main grade 3–4 toxicities observed during first cycle were neutropenia (33%), anaemia (10%), thrombocytopenia (14%) and anorexia (10%). There were no DLT observed in level 1. Three of six patients in level 2a had DLT and this level was considered the MTD. In all, 12 patients in level 2b had no DLT and this level was selected as the recommended dose. Applicable responses were one complete response and nine partial responses (48%). As toxicities were well tolerated and antitumour activities seem to be promising, this combination can be recommended for further phase II studies with APC

Sequential or alternating administration of docetaxel (Taxotere®) combined with FEC in metastatic breast cancer: a randomised phase II trial

The aim of this study, using a Fleming single-stage design, was to explore the efficacy and safety of Taxotere® 100 mg m−2 docetaxel and FEC 75 cyclophosphamide 500 mg m−2, fluorouracil 500 mg m−2 and epirubicin 75 mg m−2, in alternating and sequential schedules for the first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer. One hundred and thirty-six women were randomly allocated, to one of three treatment regimens: DTX 100 plus FEC 75, alternated for eight courses (ALT); four courses of DTX 100 followed by four courses of FEC 75 (SEQ T); or four courses of FEC 75 followed by four courses of DTX 100 (SEQ F). One hundred and thirty-one women were evaluable for tumour response. Although the treatment outcome was equivalent in the two sequential arms and the alternating regimen (P=0.110, not significant), the response rate was less encouraging in the SEQ F arm (52.3%) than in the other two arms (71.1% for ALT and 70.5% for SEQ T), in which docetaxel was administered first. Time to progression was similar in the ALT, SEQ T and SEQ F arms (9.5, 9.3 and 10.4 months respectively). Grade 3–4 neutropenia was observed in nearly all patients; febrile neutropenia occurred in 9% (ALT), 16% (SEQ T) and 2% (SEQ F) of patients. Few patients (⩽9%) developed grade 3–4 non-haematological toxicities. Relative dose intensity was 97–99% for all regimens. All treatment regimens were active and well tolerated