Search

Background: In preclinical work and retrospective population studies, the anti-diabetic drug metformin has been associated with antineoplastic activity and decreased burden of many cancers, including pancreatic cancer. There is therefore interest in the hypothesis that this drug might be repurposed for indications in oncology. We aimed to assess the efficacy of the addition of metformin to a standard systemic therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, and provide the first report of a clinical trial with a survival endpoint of metformin for an oncological indication., Methods: We did this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial at four centres in the Netherlands. Patients aged 18 years or older with advanced pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned (1:1), via a permutated computer-generated block allocation scheme (block size of six) to receive intravenous gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks and oral erlotinib (100mg) once daily in combination with either oral metformin or placebo twice daily. Metformin dose was escalated from 500 mg (in the first week) to 1000 mg twice daily in the second week. Randomisation was stratified by hospital, diabetes status, and tumour stage. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 6 months in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01210911., Findings: Between May 31, 2010, and Jan 3, 2014, we randomly assigned 121 patients to receive gemcitabine and erlotinib with either placebo (n=61) or metformin (n=60). Overall survival at 6 months was 63·9% (95% CI 51·9-75·9) in the placebo group and 56·7% (44·1-69·2) in the metformin group (p=0·41). There was no difference in overall survival between groups (median 7·6 months [95% CI 6·1-9·1] vs 6·8 months [95% CI 5·1-8·5] in the metformin group; hazard ratio [HR] 1·056 [95% CI 0·72-1·55]; log-rank p=0·78). The most frequent grade 3-4 toxic effects were neutropenia (15 [25%] patients in placebo group vs 15 [25%] in metformin group), skin rash (six [10%] vs four [7%]), diarrhoea (three [5%] vs six [10%]), and fatigue (two [3%] vs six [10%])., Interpretation: Addition of a conventional anti-diabetic dose of metformin does not improve outcome in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine and erlotinib. Future research should include studies of more potent biguanides, and should focus on patients with hyperinsulinaemia and patients with tumours showing markers of sensitivity to energetic stress, such as loss of function of AMP kinase, a key regulator of cellular energy homoeostasis., Funding: Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, and The Terry Fox Foundation, Vancouver, Canada., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The combination of an mTOR inhibitor with 5-fluorouracil-based anticancer therapy is attractive because of preclinical evidence of synergy between these drugs. According to our phase I study, the combination of capecitabine and everolimus is safe and feasible, with potential activity in pancreatic cancer patients., Methods: Patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were enrolled. Eligible patients had a WHO performance status 0-2 and adequate hepatic and renal functions. The treatment regimen consisted of capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) BID day 1-14 and everolimus 10 mg daily (5 mg BID) in a continuous 21-day schedule. Tumor assessment was performed with CT-scan every three cycles. Primary endpoint was response rate (RR) according to RECIST 1.0. Secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, overall survival and 1-year survival rate., Results: In total, 31 patients were enrolled. Median (range) treatment duration with everolimus was 76 days (1-431). Principal grade 3/4 toxicities were hyperglycemia (45 %), hand-foot syndrome (16 %), diarrhea (6 %) and mucositis (3 %). Prominent grade 1/2 toxicities were anemia (81 %), rash (65 %), mucositis (58 %) and fatigue (55 %). RR was 6 %. Ten patients (32 %) had stable disease resulting in a disease control rate of 38 %. Median overall survival was 8.9 months (95 % CI 4.6-13.1). Progression-free survival was 3.6 months (95 % CI 1.9-5.3)., Conclusions: The oral regimen with the combination of capecitabine and everolimus is a moderately active treatment for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, with an acceptable toxicity profile at the applied dose level.

Protease activated receptor (PAR)-1 expression in tumor cells is associated with disease progression and overall survival in a variety of cancers of epithelial origin; however, the importance of PAR-1 in the tumor microenvironment remains unexplored. Utilizing an orthotopic pancreatic cancer model in which tumor cells are PAR-1 positive whereas stromal cells are PAR-1 negative, we show that PAR-1 expression in the microenvironment drives progression and induces chemoresistance of pancreatic cancer. PAR-1 enhances monocyte recruitment into the tumor microenvironment by regulating monocyte migration and fibroblast dependent chemokine production thereby inducing chemoresistance. Overall, our data identify a novel role of PAR-1 in the pancreatic tumor microenvironment and suggest that PAR-1 may be an attractive target to reduce drug resistance in pancreatic cancer., (© 2014 UICC.)

Protease-activated receptor-2 (PAR-2) is a G protein-coupled receptor that functions as a cell-surface sensor for coagulation factors and other proteases associated with the tumour microenvironment. Pancreatic cancer cells express high levels of PAR-2 and activation of PAR-2 may induce their proliferation and migration. Interestingly, however, PAR-2 expression is increased in stroma-rich pancreatic cancer regions, suggesting a potential role of PAR-2 in the tumour microenvironment. Here, we assessed the importance of PAR-2 in the stromal compartment by utilizing an orthotopic pancreatic cancer model, in which tumour cells are PAR-2-positive, whereas stromal cells are PAR-2-negative. We assessed tumour weight and volume and analysed proliferation and (lymph)angiogenesis both in vivo and in vitro. We show that genetic ablation of PAR-2 from the stromal compartment inhibits primary tumour growth, which is accompanied by reduced vascularization in primary tumours and reduced in tube formation of vascular endothelial cells in vitro. In contrast to smaller primary tumours, the number of lymph node metastases was increased in PAR-2-deficient animals, which was accompanied by an increased number of lymphatic vessels. In vitro tube-formation assays show that PAR-2 does not inhibit the intrinsic tube-forming capacity of lymphatic endothelial cells, but that PAR-2 actually inhibits cancer cell-induced tube formation. Overall, stromal PAR-2 thus plays a dual role in pancreatic cancer development by potentiating primary tumour growth but limiting lymphangiogenesis and subsequent lymph node metastasis. Our data identify a novel role of PAR-2 in the tumour microenvironment and pinpoint PAR-2 as a negative regulator of lymphangiogenesis., (Copyright © 2014 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Most patients with pancreatic cancer present with advanced/metastatic disease and have a dismal prognosis. Despite the proven albeit modest benefits of gemcitabine demonstrated over a decade ago, subsequent advances have been slow, suggesting it may be time to take a different approach. It is thought that some key characteristics of pancreatic cancer, such as the desmoplasia, restricted vasculature and hypoxic environment, may prevent the delivery of chemotherapy to the tumour thereby explaining the limited benefits observed to-date. Moreover, there is evidence to suggest that the stroma is not only a mechanical barrier but also constitutes a dynamic compartment of pancreatic tumours that is critically involved in tumour formation, progression and metastasis. Thus, targeting the stroma and the tumour represents a promising therapeutic strategy. Currently, several stroma-targeting agents are entering clinical development. Among these, nab-paclitaxel appears promising since it combines cytotoxic therapy with targeted delivery via its proposed ability to bind SPARC on tumour and stromal cells. Preclinical data indicate that co-treatment with nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine results in stromal depletion, increased tumour vascularization and intratumoural gemcitabine concentration, and increased tumour regression compared with either agent alone. Phase I/II study data also suggest that a high level of antitumor activity can be achieved with this combination in pancreatic cancer. This was recently confirmed in a Phase III study which showed that nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine significantly improved overall survival (HR 0.72) and progression-free survival (HR 0.69) versus gemcitabine alone for the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Protease-activated receptor 2 (PAR-2) is a G protein-coupled receptor suggested to play an important role in the proliferation and migration of tumor cells of epithelial origin. However, the role of PAR-2 in the setting of pancreatic cancer remains largely unexplored., Objectives: To understand the importance of PAR-2 in pancreatic cancer cell migration., Methods and Results: The present study shows that PAR-2 does not affect pancreatic cancer cell proliferation but significantly induces the migration of pancreatic cancer cells in scratch assays. Interestingly, PAR-2 does not affect migration in a trans-well setting. This apparent discrepancy depends on extracellular ATP release in the scratch assays and the addition of exogenous (ATP)-induced PAR-2-dependent migration in trans-well assays, whereas a specific P2Y11 receptor antagonist prevents PAR-2-driven migration in scratch assays. In the scratch assays, inhibitors of Src, Rac, protein kinase C, mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase, p38, and epidermal growth factor (EGF) receptor blocked PAR-2-driven migration, whereas they did not affect fetal calf serum-driven wound closure., Conclusion: Taken together, PAR-2 activation drives pancreatic cancer cell migration via an EGF-Src-Rac-p38/mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase/EGF1/2 signaling pathway, which is facilitated by extracellular ATP. Targeting the PAR-2/ATP-driven signaling pathway may therefore limit cell migration, which could inhibit pancreatic cancer metastasis., (© 2013 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background: Improvements in knowledge of molecular mechanisms in cancer are the basis for new studies combining chemotherapy with targeted drugs. Inhibition of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) by erlotinib or cetuximab has limited or no activity, respectively, in pancreatic cancer. The crosstalk between EGFR and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathways is a potential mechanism of resistance; therefore we conducted a study to explore safety and efficacy of multiple pathway inhibition by cetuximab and everolimus in combination with capecitabine., Methods: Safety and efficacy of fixed standard dose cetuximab in combination with various dose levels of everolimus (5-10 mg/day) and capecitabine (600-800 mg/m(2) bid, 2 weeks every 3 weeks) were investigated in a phase I/II study in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. The primary endpoint was objective response., Results: Sixteen patients were treated in the phase I part at two dose levels. Mucositis, rash and hand-foot syndrome were dose-limiting toxicities. Dose level 1 (everolimus 5 mg/day, capecitabine 600 mg/m(2) bid for 2 weeks every 3 weeks and cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) weekly) was considered the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Of 31 patients in the phase II part, partial response was documented in two patients (6.5%) and five (16.1%) had stable disease. Median overall survival was 5.0 months (CI 3.1-6.8)., Conclusion: The schedule of capecitabine, everolimus and cetuximab resulted in considerable epidermal and mucosal toxicities and prevented escalation to optimal dose levels. Because of toxicity and low efficacy this treatment combination cannot be recommended for treatment in pancreatic cancer patients.

Background: Axitinib is a potent, selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1, 2, and 3. A randomised phase 2 trial of gemcitabine with or without axitinib in advanced pancreatic cancer suggested increased overall survival in axitinib-treated patients. On the basis of these results, we aimed to assess the effect of treatment with gemcitabine plus axitinib on overall survival in a phase 3 trial., Methods: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma, no uncontrolled hypertension or venous thrombosis, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1. Patients, stratified by disease extent (metastatic vs locally advanced), were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive gemcitabine 1000 mg/m(2) intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days plus either axitinib or placebo. Axitinib or placebo were administered orally with food at a starting dose of 5 mg twice a day, which could be dose-titrated up to 10 mg twice daily if well tolerated. A centralised randomisation procedure was used to assign patients to each treatment group, with randomised permuted blocks within strata. Patients, investigators, and the trial sponsor were masked to treatment assignments. The primary endpoint was overall survival. All efficacy analyses were done in all patients assigned to treatment groups for whom data were available; safety and treatment administration and compliance assessments were based on treatment received. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00471146., Findings: Between July 27, 2007, and Oct 31, 2008, 632 patients were enrolled and assigned to treatment groups (316 axitinib, 316 placebo). At an interim analysis in January, 2009, the independent data monitoring committee concluded that the futility boundary had been crossed. Median overall survival was 8·5 months (95% CI 6·9-9·5) for gemcitabine plus axitinib (n=314, data missing for two patients) and 8·3 months (6·9-10·3) for gemcitabine plus placebo (n=316; hazard ratio 1·014, 95% CI 0·786-1·309; one-sided p=0·5436). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events for gemcitabine plus axitinib and gemcitabine plus placebo were hypertension (20 [7%] and 5 [2%] events, respectively), abdominal pain (20 [7%] and 17 [6%]), fatigue (27 [9%] and 21 [7%]), and anorexia (19 [6%] and 11 [4%])., Interpretation: The addition of axitinib to gemcitabine does not improve overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. These results add to increasing evidence that targeting of VEGF signalling is an ineffective strategy in this disease., Funding: Pfizer., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background and Purpose: To investigate the efficacy and toxicity of a short intensive Uracil/Tegafur (UFT) based chemoradiotherapy scheme combined with celecoxib in locally advanced pancreatic cancer., Material and Methods: The Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam and the Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam enrolled 83 eligible patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer in a prospective multicentre phase II study. Median age was 62 years, median tumour size 40 mm and the majority of the patients (85%) had pancreatic head cancers. Treatment consisted of 20×2.5 Gy radiotherapy combined with UFT 300 mg/m(2) per day, leucovorin (folinic acid) 30 mg and celecoxib 80 0mg for 28 days concomitant with radiotherapy. Four patients were lost to follow-up., Results: Full treatment compliance was achieved in 55% of patients, 80% received at least 3 weeks of treatment. No partial or complete response was observed. Median survival was 10.6 months and median time to progression 6.9 months. Toxicity was substantial with 28% grades III and IV gastro-intestinal toxicity and two early toxic deaths., Conclusions: Based on the lack of response, the substantial toxicity of mainly gastro-intestinal origin and the reported mediocre overall and progression free survival, we cannot advise our short intensive chemoradiotherapy schedule combined with celecoxib as the standard treatment., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Most models of patient-physician communication take decision-making as a central concept. However, we found that often the treatment course of metastatic cancer patients is not easy to describe in straightforward terms used in decision-making models but is instead frequently more erratic. Our aim was to analyse these processes as trajectories. We used a longitudinal case study of 13 patients with metastatic colorectal and pancreatic cancer for whom palliative chemotherapy was a treatment option, and analysed 65 semi-structured interviews. We analysed three characteristics of the treatment course that contributed to the 'erraticness' of the course: (1) The treatment (with or without chemotherapy) contained many options; (2) these options were not stable entities to be decided upon, but changed identity over the course of treatment, and (3) contrary to the closure (option X means no option Y, Z, etc.) a decision implies, the treatment course was a continuous process in which options instead remained open. When the treatment course is characterised by these many and changeable options that do not result in closure, the shared decision-making model should take these into account. More attention needs to be paid to the erratic character of the process in which the doctor has to provide continuous information that is related to the changing situation of the patient; also, flexibility in dealing with protocols is warranted, as is vigilance about the overall direction of the process.