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

Weekly gemcitabine plus Epirubicin as effective chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: a multicenter phase II study

The current role of chemotherapy in pancreatic carcinoma is limited, and progress in the treatment of this disease represents a significant challenge to medical oncology. The most promising drug under study is gemcitabine, a relatively new antimetabolite that represents an attractive candidate for combination chemotherapy because of its excellent side-effect profile and the absence of overlapping toxicities with other chemotherapeutic agents. Combined administration of gemcitabine and anthracyclines could result in the induction of DNA breaks that are not easily repaired by the cell's machinery, thus enhancing the apoptotic signals triggered by these lesions. Forty-four patients with locally advanced and/or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were enrolled in this multicenter study. Patients received Epirubicin 20 mg m−2 for 3 weeks followed by 1 week of rest (1 cycle) and gemcitabine 1000 mg m−2 after Epirubicin on the same day. All were assessable for toxicity and response, 11 patients responded to treatment with one complete response and 10 partial responses, for an overall response rate of 25%. Median survival was 10.9 months (range, 2–26 months). Therapy was well tolerated, with a low incidence of haematologic grade >2 toxicity. A total of 12 of 27 (44.4%) eligible patients attained a clinical benefit response. Our findings suggest that the gemcitabine-epirubicin schedule is active and well tolerated in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer

A multicenter phase III trial comparing irinotecan-gemcitabine (IG) with gemcitabine (G) monotherapy as first-line treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer

Our purpose was to determine the response rate and median and overall survival of gemcitabine as monotherapy versus gemcitabine plus irinotecan in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma who were chemotherapy and radiotherapy naive were enrolled. Patients were centrally randomised at a one-to-one ratio to receive either gemcitabine monotherapy (900 mg m−2 on days 1, 8 and 15 every 4 weeks (arm G), or gemcitabine (days 1 and 8) plus irinotecan (300 mg m−2 on day 8) (arm IG), repeated every 3 weeks. The total number of cycles administered was 255 in the IG arm and 245 in the G arm; the median number of cycles was 3. In all, 145 patients (71 in arm IG and 74 in arm G) were enrolled; 60 and 70 patients from arms IG and G, respectively, were evaluable. A complete clinical response was achieved in three (4.3%) arm G patients; nine (15%) patients in arm IG and four (5.7%) in arm G achieved a partial response. The overall response rate was: arm IG 15% and arm G 10% (95% CI 5.96–24.04 and 95% CI 2.97–17.03, respectively; P=0.387). The median time to tumour progression was 2.8 months and 2.9 months and median survival time was 6.4 and 6.5 months for the IG and G arms, respectively. One-year survival was 24.3% for the IG arm and 21.8% for the G arm. No statistically significant difference was observed comparing gemcitabine monotherapy versus gemcitabine plus irinotecan in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer, with respect to overall and 1-year survival

A preclinical evaluation of pemetrexed and irinotecan combination as second-line chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer

Gemcitabine (GEM)-based chemotherapy is regarded as the standard treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but yields a very limited disease control. Very few studies have investigated salvage chemotherapy after failure of GEM or GEM-containing chemotherapy and preclinical studies attempting to widen the therapeutic armamentarium, not including GEM, are warranted. MIA PaCa2, CFPAC-1 and Capan-1 pancreatic cancer cell lines were treated with GEM, fluouracil (5-FU), docetaxel (DCT), oxaliplatin (OXP), irinotecan (CPT-11), pemetrexed (PMX) and raltitrexed (RTX) as single agent. Pemetrexed, inducing apoptosis with IC50s under the Cmax in the three lines tested, appeared the most effective drug as single agent. Based on these results, schedule- and concentration-dependent drug interactions (assessed using the combination index) of PMX/GEM, PMX/DCT and PMX–CPT-11 were evaluated. The combinatory study clearly indicated the PMX and CPT-11 combination as the most active against pancreatic cancer. To confirm the efficacy of PMX–CPT-11 combination, we extended the study to a panel of 10 pancreatic cancer cell lines using clinically relevant concentrations (PMX 10 μM; CPT-11 1 μm). In eight of 10 lines, the PMX–CPT-11 treatment significantly reduced cell recovery and increased both the subG1 and caspase 3/7 fraction. After a 5-day wash out period, an increased fraction of subG1 and caspase3/7 persisted in PMX–CPT-11-pretreated cell lines and a significant reduction in the clonogenicity capacity was evident. Finally, in vivo, the PMX/CPT-11 combination showed the ability to inhibit xenograft tumours growth as second-line therapy after GEM treatment. The PMX and CPT-11 combination displays a strong schedule-independent synergistic cytotoxic activity against pancreatic cancer, providing experimental basis for its clinical testing as salvage chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients

Opportunistic screening for iron-deficiency in 636 month old children presenting to the paediatric emergency department

BACKGROUND:The Complete Blood Count (CBC) is a test frequently performed on children presenting to the Pediatric Emergency Department (PED), usually for the evaluation of an infectious illness. The CBC also allows for screening for Iron-deficiency Anemia. This study aims to determine the prevalence of a low Mean Cell Volume (MCV) in children having a CBC performed during a PED visit and whether physicians acted upon the abnormal value.METHODS:We present a retrospective cohort study. We reviewed the PED charts of all children 636 months of age who had a CBC performed during a 4-month period and the red blood cell mean cell volume was low. Our main outcome variable was whether or not the possible iron deficiency was addressed through documentation of either iron therapy or further investigation.RESULTS:938 children had a CBC performed during the two periods. Of these, 78 (8%) had an abnormal MCV or Hemoglobin with no previously identified explanation. Physicians documented either treatment or follow-up investigations in 27 cases (35%, 95% CI: 2446%). Factors associated with the physician documenting either treatment or investigation plan were the following: hemoglobin level (OR 12.6; 95%CI: 4.0, 39) and age = 18 months (OR 4.2; 95%CI: 1.4, 13).CONCLUSION:Children who have had a CBC in the PED can be screened for iron deficiency at no additional cost. Physicians may be under-utilizing this information