Advertisement

Tumor Biology

, Volume 35, Issue 11, pp 11551–11558 | Cite as

Outcome of gemcitabine plus molecular targeted agent for treatment of pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of prospective phase III studies

  • Lin Chen
  • Ming Zhang
  • Shuchun Luo
Research Article

Abstract

The aim of this study is to assess the clinical outcome of gemcitabine (GEM) plus molecular targeted agents (MTAs) for treatment of pancreatic cancer, in the purpose of providing fundamental data for clinical practice. Databases like PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Library were searched to retrieve phase III clinical randomized controlled trials related to GEM plus MTAs for pancreatic cancer (up to Oct 2013). Literatures were independently screened by two researchers according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Data were extracted and analyzed by using Stata 11.0 software. Total, 11 studies were included, involving 5,451 participants who were divided into GEM plus MTAs group (n = 2,729) and GEM plus placebo group (n = 2,722). There was no significant difference in overall survival, progression-free survival, response rate, complete response, partial response, and clinical benefit rate between two groups. Compared with GEM plus placebo group, stable disease of GEM plus MTAs group was significantly increased (risk ratios (RRs) = 1.14, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.04–1.21, P = 0.003). Further subgroup analysis indicated that GEM plus epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor use induced higher response rate and clinical benefit rate than GEM plus placebo group (RRs = 1.19, 95 % CI 1.09–1.31, P = 0.000; RR = 1.18, 95 % CI 1.09–1.27, P = 0.000). In addition, no significant difference in 3–4 grade adverse reactions (incidence, anemia rate, neutropenia rate, and thrombocytopenia rate) was identified between two groups. GEM plus MTAs may be effective and safe for stabilizing patients suffering advanced pancreatic cancer, especially EGFR inhibitor.

Keywords

Pancreatic cancer Gemcitabine Molecular-targeted drug Meta-analysis 

Notes

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62:10–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Holly EA, Chaliha I, Bracci PM, Gautam M. Signs and symptoms of pancreatic cancer: a population-based case-control study in the San Francisco Bay area. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2004;2:510–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Colucci G, Labianca R, Di Costanzo F, Gebbia V, Cartenì G, Massidda B, et al. Randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine plus cisplatin compared with single-agent gemcitabine as first-line treatment of patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: the GIP-1 study. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1645–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Alone C. Controversies in the adjuvant treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. JOP. 2007;8:545–52.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Burris H, Moore MJ, Andersen J, Green MR, Rothenberg ML, Modiano MR. Improvements in survival and clinical benefit with gemcitabine as first-line therapy for patients with advanced pancreas cancer: a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2403–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Eltawil KM, Renfrew PD, Molinari M. Meta-analysis of phase III randomized trials of molecular targeted therapies for advanced pancreatic cancer. HPB (Oxford). 2012;14:260–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cao Y, Wu L, Tan A, Liu L, Liao C, Gao F. Meta-analysis of randomized trials: evaluation of benefit of gemcitabine-based molecular targeted therapy for inoperable pancreatic cancer. Pancreas. 2010;39:253–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ciliberto D, Botta C, Correale P, Rossi M, Caraglia M, Tassone P, et al. Role of gemcitabine-based combination therapy in the management of advanced pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis of randomised trials. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:593–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Borja-Cacho D, Jensen EH, Saluja AK, Buchsbaum DJ, Vickers SM. Molecular targeted therapies for pancreatic cancer. Am J Surg. 2008;196:430–41.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, Figer A, Hecht JR, Gallinger S, et al. Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1960–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Rougier P, Riess H, Manges R, Karasek P, Humblet Y, Barone C, et al. Randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group phase III study evaluating aflibercept in patients receiving first-line treatment with gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:2633–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kindler HL, Ioka T, Richel DJ, Bennouna J, Létourneau R, Okusaka T, et al. Axitinib plus gemcitabine versus placebo plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a double-blind randomised phase 3 study. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12:256–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJM, Gavaghan DJ, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials. 1996;17:1–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Begg CB, Mazumdar M. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics. 1994;50:1088–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ. 1997;315:629–34.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bramhall S, Schulz J, Nemunaitis J, Brown P, Baillet M, Buckels J. A double-blind placebo-controlled, randomised study comparing gemcitabine and marimastat with gemcitabine and placebo as first line therapy in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Br J Cancer. 2002;87:161–7.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Van Cutsem E, Van de Velde H, Karasek P, Oettle H, Vervenne W, Szawlowski A, et al. Phase III trial of gemcitabine plus tipifarnib compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in advanced pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:1430–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Oettle H, Richards D, Ramanathan R, Van Laethem JL, Peeters M, Fuchs M, et al. A phase III trial of pemetrexed plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine in patients with unresectable or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Ann Oncol. 2005;16:1639–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Senderowicz AM, Johnson JR, Sridhara R, Zimmerman P, Justice R, Pazdur R. Erlotinib/gemcitabine for first-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Oncology (Williston Park). 2007; 21:1696–1706; discussion 1706–1699, 1712, 1715.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eckhardt SG, De Porre P, Smith D, Maurel J, Steward WP, Bouche O, et al. Patient-reported outcomes as a component of the primary endpoint in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in advanced pancreatic cancer. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2009;37:135–43.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kindler HL, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, Sutherland S, Schrag D, Hurwitz H, et al. Gemcitabine plus bevacizumab compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: phase III trial of the Cancer and Leukemia group B (CALGB 80303). J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3617–22.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Philip PA, Benedetti J, Corless CL, Wong R, O'Reilly EM, Flynn PJ, et al. Phase III study comparing gemcitabine plus cetuximab versus gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Southwest oncology group–directed intergroup trial S0205. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:3605–10.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Goncalves A, Gilabert M, François E, Dahan L, Perrier H, Lamy R, et al. BAYPAN study: a double-blind phase III randomized trial comparing gemcitabine plus sorafenib and gemcitabine plus placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:2799–805.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hu J, Zhao G, Wang HX, Tang L, Xu YC, Ma Y, et al. A meta-analysis of gemcitabine containing chemotherapy for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Hematol Oncol. 2011;4:11.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Breathnach OS, Freidlin B, Conley B, Green MR, Johnson DH, Gandara DR, et al. Twenty-two years of phase III trials for patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer: Sobering results. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:1734–42.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Normanno N, De Luca A, Bianco C, Strizzi L, Mancino M, Maiello MR, et al. Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling in cancer. Gene. 2006;366:2–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ueda S, Ogata S, Tsuda H, Kawarabayashi N, Kimura M, Sugiura Y, et al. The correlation between cytoplasmic overexpression of epidermal growth factor receptor and tumor aggressiveness: poor prognosis in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Pancreas. 2004;29:1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Bloomston M, Bhardwaj A, Ellison EC, Frankel WL. Epidermal growth factor receptor expression in pancreatic carcinoma using tissue microarray technique. Dig Surg. 2006;23:74–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Scaltriti M, Baselga J. The epidermal growth factor receptor pathway: a model for targeted therapy. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:5268–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yewale C, Baradia D, Vhora I, Patil S, Misra A. Epidermal growth factor receptor targeting in cancer: a review of trends and strategies. Biomaterials. 2013;34:8690–707.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bruns CJ, Shrader M, Harbison MT, Portera C, Solorzano CC, Jauch KW, et al. Effect of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 antibody DC101 plus gemcitabine on growth, metastasis and angiogenesis of human pancreatic cancer growing orthotopically in nude mice. Int J Cancer. 2002;102:101–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© International Society of Oncology and BioMarkers (ISOBM) 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of OncologySichuan Provincial Hospital and Sichuan Academy of Medical ScienceChengduChina
  2. 2.No.32, Section 2ChengduPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations