The ‘ins and outs’ of colonoscopy at Wits Donald Gordon Medical Centre, South Africa: A practice audit of the outpatient endoscopy unit

Background. In South Africa, there are no national guidelines for the conduct or quality assessment of colonoscopy, the gold standard for investigation and diagnosis of bowel pathology.Objectives. To describe the clinical profile of patients and evaluate the practice of colonoscopy using procedural quality indicators at the Wits Donald Gordon Medical Centre (WDGMC) outpatient endoscopy unit (OEU).Methods. We conducted a prospective, clinical practice audit of colonoscopies performed on adults (≥18 years of age). A total of 1 643 patients were included in the study and variables that were collected enabled the assessment of adequacy of bowel preparation, length of withdrawal time and calculation of caecal intubation rate (CIR), polyp detection rate (PDR) and adenoma detection rate (ADR). We stratified PDR and ADR by sex, age, population group, withdrawal time and bowel preparation. CIR, PDR and ADR estimates were compared between patient groups by the χ2 test; Fisher’s exact test was used for 2 × 2 tables. A p-value <0.05 was used. Benchmark recommendations by the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ASGE)/American College of Gastroenterology (ACG) Task Force on Colorectal Cancer (CRC) were used in this audit to assess individual endoscopist performance and that of the endoscopy unit as a whole.Results. The mean age of patients was 55.7 (standard deviation (SD) 14.4; range 18 - 91) years, ~60% were female, and the majority (75.5%) were white. Of the outpatients, 77.6% had adequate bowel preparation (ASGE/ACG benchmark ≥85%). The CIR was 97.0% overall, and screening colonoscopy was 96.3% (ASGE/ACG benchmark ≥90% overall and ≥95% for screening colonoscopies). The median withdrawal time for negative-result screening colonoscopies was 5.7 minutes (interquartile range (IQR) 4.2 - 9.3; range 1.1 - 20.6) (ASGE/ACG benchmark ≥ 6minutes), and PDR and ADR were 27.6% and 15.6%, respectively (ASGE/ACG benchmark ADR ≥25%). We demonstrated a 23.7% increase in PDR and 14.1% increase in ADR between scopes that had mean withdrawal times of ≥6 minutes and <6 minutes, respectively. Although the number of black Africans in the study was relatively small, our results showed that they have similar ADRs and PDRs to the white population group, contradicting popular belief.Conclusions. The WDGMC OEU performed reasonably well against the international guidelines, despite some inadequacy in bowel preparation and lower than recommended median withdrawal times on negative-result colonoscopy. Annual auditing of clinical practice and availability of these data in the public domain will become standard of care, making this audit a baseline for longitudinal observation, assessing the impact of interventions, and contributing to the development of local guidelines

Parenteral nutrition support for patients with pancreatic cancer. Results of a phase II study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Cachexia is a common problem in patients (pts) suffering from upper gastrointestinal cancer. In addition, most of these patients suffer from malabsorption and stenosis of the gastrointestinal tract due to their illness. Various methods of supplementary nutrition (enteral, parenteral) are practised. In patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC), phase angle, determined by bio-electrical impedance analysis (BIA), seems to be a survival predictor. The positive influence of BIA determinate predictors by additional nutrition is currently under discussion.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>To examine the impact of additional parenteral nutrition (APN) we assessed outpatients suffering from APC and progressive cachexia. The assessment based on the BIA method. Assessment parameters were phase angle, ECM/BCM index (ratio of extracellular mass to body cell mass), and BMI (body mass index). Patients suffering from progressive weight loss in spite of additional enteral nutritional support were eligible for the study.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Median treatment duration in 32 pts was 18 [8-35] weeks. Response evaluation showed a benefit in 27 pts (84%) in at least one parameter. 14 pts (43.7%) improved or stabilised in all three parameters. The median ECM/BCM index was 1.7 [1.11-3.14] at start of APN and improved down to 1.5 [1.12-3.36] during therapy. The median BMI increased from 19.7 [14.4-25.9] to 20.5 [15.4-25.0]. The median phase angle improved by 10% from 3.6 [2.3-5.1] to 3.9 [2.2-5.1].</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We demonstrated the positive impact of APN on the assessed parameters, first of all the phase angle, and we observed at least a temporary benefit or stabilisation of the nutritional status in the majority of the investigated patients. Based on these findings we are currently investigating the impact of APN on survival in a larger patient cohort.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00919659</p

Is there a role for the quantification of RRM1 and ERCC1 expression in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma?

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>RRM1 and ERCC1 overexpression has been extensively investigated as potential predictive markers of tumor sensitivity to conventional chemotherapy agents, most thoroughly in lung cancer. However, data in pancreatic cancer are scarce.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated the mRNA and protein expression of ERCC1 and RRM1 by RT-PCR and immunohistochemistry (IHC) in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded pancreatic ductal carcinoma (PDA) tissues. The primary outcome investigated was the association between RRM1 and ERCC1 expression and overall survival (OS) or disease-free survival (DFS).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>A total of 94 patients with resected PDA were included in this study. Most of them (87%) received gemcitabine based chemotherapy. Data for OS analysis was available in all cases but only 68% had enough information to estimate DFS. IHC analysis revealed information for 99% (93/94) and 100% of the cases for RRM1 and ERCC1 expression respectively. However, PCR data interpretation was possible in only 49 (52%) and 79 (84%) cases respectively. There was no significant association between high or low expression of either RRM1 or ERCC1, detected by IHC and OS (14.4 vs. 19.9 months; <it>P </it>= 0.5 and 17.1 vs. 19.9; <it>P </it>= 0.83 respectively) or PCR and OS (48.0 vs. 24.1 months; <it>P </it>= 0.21 and 22.0 vs. 16.0 months; <it>P </it>= 0.39 respectively). Similar results were obtained for DFS.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>RRM1 and ERCC1 expression does not seem to have a clear predictive or prognostic value in pancreatic cancer. Our data raise some questions regarding the real clinical and practical significance of analyzing these molecules as predictors of outcomes.</p

Gemcitabine with a specific conformal 3D 5FU radiochemotherapy technique is safe and effective in the definitive management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer

The aim of this phase II study was to assess the feasibility and efficacy of a specific three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy technique with concurrent continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (CI 5FU) sandwiched between gemcitabine chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Patients with inoperable cancer in the pancreatic head or body without metastases were given gemcitabine at 1000 mg m−2 weekly for 3 weeks followed by a 1-week rest and a 6-week period of radiotherapy and concurrent CI 5FU (200 mg m−2 day−1). The defined target volume was treated to 54 Gy in 30 daily fractions of 1.8 Gy. After 4 weeks' rest, gemcitabine treatment was re-initiated for three cycles (days 1, 8, 15, q28). Forty-one patients were enrolled. At the end of radiotherapy, one patient (2.4%) had a complete response and four patients (9.6%) had a partial response; at the end of treatment, three patients (7.3%) had a complete response and two patients (4.9%) had a partial response. Median survival time was 11.7 months, median time to progression was 7.1 months, and median time to failure of local control was 11.9 months. The 1- and 2-year survival rates were 46.3 and 9.8%, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 toxicities were reported by 16 (39.0%) and four (9.8%) patients, respectively. Sixteen out of 41 patients did not complete the planned treatment and nine due to disease progression. This approach to treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer is safe and promising, with good local control for a substantial proportion of patients, and merits testing in a randomised trial

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

A novel biweekly pancreatic cancer treatment schedule with gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a common disease considered to be poorly responsive to antiblastic treatment. Recent clinical and preclinical results suggest that a combined treatment of gemcitabine (GEM), 5-flurouracil (5-FU) and folinic acid (FA) offers a clinical benefit in patients with advanced pancreas adenocarcinoma. The aim of this phase II clinical trial was to evaluate the antitumour activity and toxicity of a novel biweekly schedule of this combination in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A total of 42 patients received a 30 min infusion of FA (100 mgm2) and 5-FU (400 mgm2) (FUFA) on days 1–3, and GEM 1000 mgm2 on day 1 every 15 days. We observed 13 objective responses (two complete, 11 partial) and 23 stable diseases. The median time to progression was 9.75 months (95% Confidence Interval (CI), 6.88–12.62) and the median overall survival was 13.10 months (95% CI 9.64–16.56). There were seven cases of each grade III gastroenteric and haematological toxicity. The GEM plus FUFA combination appears to be well tolerated and very active in patients with pancreatic carcinoma

A Randomized Multicentre Phase II Trial Comparing Adjuvant Therapy in Patients with Interferon Alpha-2b and 5-FU Alone or in Combination with Either External Radiation Treatment and Cisplatin (CapRI) or Radiation alone regarding Event-Free Survival – CapRI-2

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The 5-year survival of patients with resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma is still unsatisfying. The ESPAC-1 and the CONKO 001 trial proofed that adjuvant chemotherapy improves 5-year survival significantly from approximately 14% to 21%. In parallel, investigators from the Virginia Mason Clinic reported a 5-year survival rate of 55% in a phase II trial evaluating a combination of adjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy and external beam radiation (CapRI-scheme). Two other groups confirmed in phase II trials these results to a certain extent. However, these groups reported severe gastrointestinal toxicity (up to 93% grade 3 or 4 toxicity). In a randomized controlled phase III trial, called CapRI, 110 patients were enrolled from 2004 to 2007 in Germany and Italy to check for reproducibility. Interestingly, much less gastrointestinal toxicity was observed. However, dose-reduction due to haematological side effects had to be performed in nearly all patients. First clinical results are expected for the end of 2009.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>CapRI-2 is an open, controlled, prospective, randomized, multicentre phase II trial with three parallel arms. A de-escalation of the CapRI-scheme will be tested in two different modifications. Patients in study arm A will be treated as outpatients with the complete CapRI-scheme consisting of cisplatin, Interferon alpha-2b and external beam radiation and three cycles of 5-fluorouracil continuous infusion. In study arm B the first de-escalation will be realised by omitting cisplatin. Next, patients in study arm C will additionally not receive external beam radiation. A total of 135 patients with pathologically confirmed R0 or R1 resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma are planned to be enrolled. Primary endpoint is the comparison of the treatment groups with respect to six-month event-free-survival. An event is defined as grade 3 or grade 4 toxicity, objective tumour recurrence, or death.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>The aim of this clinical trial is to evaluate de-escalation of the CapRI-scheme. It is hypothesised that removal of cisplatin and radiotherapy will have no significant effect or only a minor impact on the clinical response but result in substantially lower toxicity.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN79802092</p

Meta-analysis of randomized trials: evaluation of benefit from gemcitabine-based combination chemotherapy applied in advanced pancreatic cancer

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Single-agent gemcitabine (GEM) is a standard treatment for advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. This study examines the question whether GEM-based combination chemotherapy can further improve treatment efficacy.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A meta-analysis was performed to evaluate randomized trials comparing GEM versus GEM+X (X = cytotoxic agent). Fifteen trials including 4465 patients were eligible for an analysis of overall survival, the primary end-point of this investigation.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The meta-analysis revealed a significant survival benefit for GEM+X with a pooled hazard ratio (HR) of 0.91 (95% CI: 0.85 – 0.97, p = 0.004). The overall test for heterogeneity resulted in p = 0.82 (I²= 0%). The analysis of platinum-based combinations indicated a HR of 0.85 (95% CI: 0.76 – 0.96, p = 0.010), while for fluoropyrimidine-based combinations the HR was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.81 – 0.99, p = 0.030). No risk reduction was observed in the group of trials combining GEM with irinotecan, exatecan or pemetrexed (HR = 0.99). A meta-analysis of the trials with adequate information on baseline performance status (PS) was performed in five trials with 1682 patients. This analysis indicated that patients with a good PS had a marked survival benefit when receiving combination chemotherapy (HR = 0.76; 95% CI: 0.67 – 0.87; p < 0.0001). By contrast, application of combination chemotherapy to patients with an initially poor PS appeared to be ineffective (HR = 1.08; 95% CI: 0.90 – 1.29, p = 0.40).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The meta-analysis of randomized trials indicated a significant survival benefit when GEM was either combined with platinum analogs or fluoropyrimidines. Based on a preliminary subgroup analysis (representing 38% of all patients included in this meta-analysis), pancreatic cancer patients with a good PS appear to benefit from GEM-based cytotoxic combinations, whereas patients with a poor PS seem to have no survival benefit from combination chemotherapy.</p

DPEP1 Inhibits Tumor Cell Invasiveness, Enhances Chemosensitivity and Predicts Clinical Outcome in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal cancers worldwide. To identify biologically relevant genes with prognostic and therapeutic significance in PDAC, we first performed the microarray gene-expression profiling in 45 matching pairs of tumor and adjacent non-tumor tissues from resected PDAC cases. We identified 36 genes that were associated with patient outcome and also differentially expressed in tumors as compared with adjacent non-tumor tissues in microarray analysis. Further evaluation in an independent validation cohort (N = 27) confirmed that DPEP1 (dipeptidase 1) expression was decreased (T: N ratio ∼0.1, P<0.01) in tumors as compared with non-tumor tissues. DPEP1 gene expression was negatively correlated with histological grade (Spearman correlation coefficient = −0.35, P = 0.004). Lower expression of DPEP1 in tumors was associated with poor survival (Kaplan Meier log rank) in both test cohort (P = 0.035) and validation cohort (P = 0.016). DPEP1 expression was independently associated with cancer-specific mortality when adjusted for tumor stage and resection margin status in both univariate (hazard ratio = 0.43, 95%CI = 0.24–0.76, P = 0.004) and multivariate analyses (hazard ratio = 0.51, 95%CI = 0.27–0.94, P = 0.032). We further demonstrated that overexpression of DPEP1 suppressed tumor cells invasiveness and increased sensitivity to chemotherapeutic agent Gemcitabine. Our data also showed that growth factor EGF treatment decreased DPEP1 expression and MEK1/2 inhibitor AZD6244 increased DPEP1 expression in vitro, indicating a potential mechanism for DPEP1 gene regulation. Therefore, we provide evidence that DPEP1 plays a role in pancreatic cancer aggressiveness and predicts outcome in patients with resected PDAC. In view of these findings, we propose that DPEP1 may be a candidate target in PDAC for designing improved treatments