Search

Background: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer., Methods: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m 2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m 2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434., Findings: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group., Interpretation: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma., Funding: Cancer Research UK., (Copyright © 2017 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an Open Access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: The presence of positive nodal disease (LND) and the number of lymph nodes involved (LNB) are known to be significant prognostic markers for resected adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. In addition, the ratio of the number of involved nodes to the number of nodes resected known as the lymph node ratio (LNR) is emerging as an important prognostic marker. The role of the resection margin (RM) as presently defined (R1 ≤ 1 mm) is unclear as results differ based on the dataset. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of nodal disease and a redefined RM on outcome., Material and Methods: Retrospective analysis of pancreatic head resections for adenocarcinomas from 2003-2009. The RM was re-analysed based on tumour clearance and categorized into: histopathological evidence of a tumour; ≤ 0.5 mm, ≤ 1 mm, ≤ 1.5 mm, or ≤ 2.0 mm of the actual surgical resection margin. The impact of histopathological variables on cancer-specific survival (CSS) and disease-free survival (DFS) was analysed., Results: LND, LNB and LNR were independent prognostic markers for CSS (P = 0.048, 0.003, 0.016) but, did not influence DFS. A LNR < 0.143 was associated with a higher CSS [38.16 ± 4.69 versus 20.59 ± 2.20 months, P = 0.0042, hazard ratio (HR) 3.74 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.52-9.23)]. An R1 RM was not associated with CSS or DFS on multivariate analysis, irrespective of the distance. LNB and LNR maintained independent significance irrespective of the size of the RM., Conclusion: LNB and LNR are the only prognostic factors for CSS in patients with pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, but do not predict recurrence. Microscopic RMs does not seem to influence the outcome even when redefined. Further prospective studies are indicated to substantiate these findings., (© 2013 International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association.)

Background & Aims: Standard RECIST criteria may not be the optimal method to assess response to loco-regional therapy for hepatocellular cancer (HCC). EASL and mRECIST, which measure changes in arterialized tumor, have been proposed. Here we compare the three criteria and their associations with survival., Methods: Response was determined using RECIST 1.1, EASL, and mRECIST criteria in 83 consecutive patients with HCC undergoing palliative therapy with transarterial (chemo) embolization. Results were compared at the first assessment after therapy. Cox regression and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to explore differences in overall survival between the responders and non-responders defined by each method., Results: There was a good correlation between EASL and mRECIST with overall response rates; 58% and 57%, and target lesion responses; 74% and 73%, respectively. There was a poor correlation with RECIST 1.1 with overall and target response rates of 7%. Overall and target lesion progression rates were similar for all three assessments; 27% and 2% for both EASL and mRECIST and 28% and 6% for RECIST 1.1. There was a significant association between survival and overall EASL and mRECIST responses, which was retained in multivariate analysis. EASL response was associated with a 44% risk reduction and mRECIST with a 42% reduction. There was no significant association between survival for RECIST 1.1 responses or target EASL and mRECIST responses., Conclusions: When measured at a single, early time point post-therapy, EASL and mRECIST overall response rates are associated with survival and should be used in preference to RECIST 1.1 or target responses., (Copyright © 2011 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Cytotoxic T lymphocytes (CTLs) specific for an HLA-A2-presented peptide epitope of the Wilms tumor antigen-1 (WT1) can selectively kill immature human leukemia progenitor and stem cells in vitro. In this study we have used retroviral gene transfer to introduce a WT1-specific T-cell receptor (TCR) into T lymphocytes obtained from patients with leukemia and from healthy donors. TCR-transduced T cells kill leukemia cells in vitro and display WT1-specific cytokine production. Intravenous injection of TCR-transduced T cells into nonobese diabetic-severe combined immunodeficiency (NOD/SCID) mice harboring human leukemia cells resulted in leukemia elimination, whereas transfer of control T cells transduced with an irrelevant TCR was ineffective. The data suggest that adoptive immunotherapy with WT1-TCR gene-modified patient T cells should be considered for the treatment of leukemia.

After termination of pregnancy for non-medical reasons, the products of conception are often not routinely examined for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia. Between 1995 and 2001 we identified 15 women without and 36 women with a pathological diagnosis of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia at the time of their pregnancy termination. Women without a diagnosis were significantly more likely to have subsequent life-threatening complications of gestational trophoblastic neoplasia (four of 15 vs none of 36; p=0.003), and to require surgical intervention (15 of 15 vs one of 36; p<0.0001) and chemotherapy (nine of 15 vs two of 36; p<0.0001). All women should be screened for gestational trophoblastic neoplasia after termination of pregnancy.