Medline ® Abstracts for References 64-66
of 'Treatment for potentially resectable exocrine pancreatic cancer'
Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of phase II trials.
Assifi MM, Lu X, Eibl G, Reber HA, Li G, Hines OJ
Surgery. 2011 Sep;150(3):466-73.
BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant treatment has proven beneficial for many gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, but no phase III trials have been completed examining this approach in pancreatic cancer. This meta-analysis examines the best available phase II trials using neoadjuvant treatment for resectable and borderline/unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
METHODS: Phase II trials were identified using a MEDLINE search, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1960 to July 2010. Patients were divided into 2 groups: Patients with initially resectable tumors (group A), and patients with borderline/unresectable tumors (group B). Primary outcome measures were rate of resection and survival. Pooled proportions and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effects or fixed-effects models based on the heterogeneity of included studies.
RESULTS: A total of 14 phase II clinical trials including 536 patients were analyzed. After treatment, resectability was 65.8% (95% CI, 55.4-75.6%) compared with 31.6% in group B (95% CI, 14.0-52.5%). A partial response was observed in patients with borderline/unresectable tumors; 31.8 (95% CI, 24.2-39.8%) in group B and 9.5% (95% CI, 2.9-19.4%) in group A (P = .003). Progressive disease was seen in 17.0% (95% CI, 11.9-22.7) of patients in group A versus 21.8% (95% CI, 10.1-36.5%) in group B (P = .006). Median survival in resected patients was 23 months for group A and 22 months for group B.
CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant treatment seems to have some activity in patients with borderline/unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Nearly one third of tumors initially deemed marginal for operative intervention were able to be ultimately resected after treatment. Until more effective targeted chemotherapeutics are developed, the only group of patients with pancreatic cancer that may benefit from neoadjuvant treatment are those with locally advanced disease.
Department of Surgery, UCLA School of Public Health, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Neoadjuvant/preoperative gemcitabine for patients with localized pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of prospective studies.
Andriulli A, Festa V, Botteri E, Valvano MR, Koch M, Bassi C, Maisonneuve P, Sebastiano PD
Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(5):1644. Epub 2011 Oct 20.
BACKGROUND: Long-term prognosis for localized pancreatic cancer remains poor. We sought to assess the benefit of neoadjuvant/preoperative chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy.
METHODS: Prospective studies where gemcitabine with or without radiotherapy was provided before surgery in patients with initially resectable or unresectable disease were reviewed by meta-analysis. Primary outcome was survival, and secondary outcomes were tumor response after therapy, toxicity, surgical exploration, and resection rates.
RESULTS: Twenty independent studies with 707 participants were included, 366 with resectable lesions and 341 with unresectable lesions. Seven studies were phase I/II trials, 10 phase II, and 3 prospective cohort studies. Estimated 1- and 2-year survival probabilities after resection were 91.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]75-100) and 67.2% (95% CI 38-87) for initially resectable patients, and 86.3% (95% CI 78-100) and 54.2% (95% CI 25-100) for initially unresectable patients. The complete/partial response rate was 12%(95% CI 4-23) and 27% (95% CI 18-38) in resectable and unresectable lesions, respectively. The rate of treatment-related grade 3-4 toxicity was 31% (95% CI 21-42). Of resectable patients evaluable after restaging, 91% (95% CI 83-97) underwent surgery, and 82% (95% CI 65-95) of explored patients underwent resection. R0 resections amounted to 89% (95% CI 83-94). Of unresectable patients evaluable after restaging, 39% (95% CI 28-50) underwent surgery, and 68% (95% CI 53-82) of explored patients were resected, with 60% (95% CI 50-71) R0 resections.
CONCLUSIONS: Current analysis provides marginal support to the assumed benefits of neoadjuvant therapies for patients with resectable cancer, and indicates a potential advantage only for a minority of those with unresectable lesions.
Division of Gastroenterology, "Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza" Hospital, IRCCS, San Giovanni Rotondo, Italy.
Preoperative/neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of response and resection percentages.
Gillen S, Schuster T, Meyer Zum Büschenfelde C, Friess H, Kleeff J
PLoS Med. 2010;7(4):e1000267. Epub 2010 Apr 20.
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer has an extremely poor prognosis and prolonged survival is achieved only by resection with macroscopic tumor clearance. There is a strong rationale for a neoadjuvant approach, since a relevant percentage of pancreatic cancer patients present with non-metastatic but locally advanced disease and microscopic incomplete resections are common. The objective of the present analysis was to systematically review studies concerning the effects of neoadjuvant therapy on tumor response, toxicity, resection, and survival percentages in pancreatic cancer.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: Trials were identified by searching MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1966 to December 2009 as well as through reference lists of articles and proceedings of major meetings. Retrospective and prospective studies analyzing neoadjuvant radiochemotherapy, radiotherapy, or chemotherapy of pancreatic cancer patients, followed by re-staging, and surgical exploration/resection were included. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed study quality. Pooled relative risks and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random-effects models. Primary outcome measures were proportions of tumor response categories and percentages of exploration and resection. A total of 111 studies (n = 4,394) including 56 phase I-II trials were analyzed. A median of 31 (interquartile range [IQR]19-46) patients per study were included. Studies were subdivided into surveys considering initially resectable tumors (group 1) and initially non-resectable (borderline resectable/unresectable) tumors (group 2). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was given in 96.4% of the studies with the main agents gemcitabine, 5-FU (and oral analogues), mitomycin C, and platinum compounds. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was applied in 93.7% of the studies with doses ranging from 24 to 63 Gy. Averaged complete/partial response probabilities were 3.6% (95% CI 2%-5.5%)/30.6% (95% CI 20.7%-41.4%) and 4.8% (95% CI 3.5%-6.4%)/30.2% (95% CI 24.5%-36.3%) for groups 1 and 2, respectively; whereas progressive disease fraction was estimated to 20.9% (95% CI 16.9%-25.3%) and 20.8% (95% CI 14.5%-27.8%). In group 1, resectability was estimated to 73.6% (95% CI 65.9%-80.6%) compared to 33.2% (95% CI 25.8%-41.1%) in group 2. Higher resection-associated morbidity and mortality rates were observed in group 2 versus group 1 (26.7%, 95% CI 20.7%-33.3% versus 39.1%, 95% CI 29.5%-49.1%; and 3.9%, 95% CI 2.2%-6% versus 7.1%, 95% CI 5.1%-9.5%). Combination chemotherapies resulted in higher estimated response and resection probabilities for patients with initially non-resectable tumors ("non-resectable tumor patients") compared to monotherapy. Estimated median survival following resection was 23.3 (range 12-54) mo for group 1 and 20.5 (range 9-62) mo for group 2 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with initially resectable tumors ("resectable tumor patients"), resection frequencies and survival after neoadjuvant therapy are similar to those of patients with primarily resected tumors and adjuvant therapy. Approximately one-third of initially staged non-resectable tumor patients would be expected to have resectable tumors following neoadjuvant therapy, with comparable survival as initially resectable tumor patients. Thus, patients with locally non-resectable tumors should be included in neoadjuvant protocols and subsequently re-evaluated for resection.
Department of Surgery, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.