Advertisement

Perioperative Gemcitabine + Erlotinib Plus Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: ACOSOG Z5041 (Alliance) Phase II Trial

  • Alice C. WeiEmail author
  • Fang-Shu Ou
  • Qian Shi
  • Xiomara Carrero
  • Eileen M. O’Reilly
  • Jeffrey Meyerhardt
  • Robert A. Wolff
  • Hedy L. Kindler
  • Douglas B. Evans
  • Vikram Deshpande
  • Joseph Misdraji
  • Eric Tamm
  • Dushyant Sahani
  • Malcolm Moore
  • Elliot Newman
  • Nipun Merchant
  • Jordan Berlin
  • Laura W. Goff
  • Peter Pisters
  • Mitchell C. Posner
Pancreatic Tumors
  • 5 Downloads

Abstract

Background

There is considerable interest in a neoadjuvant approach for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study evaluated perioperative gemcitabine + erlotinib (G+E) for resectable PDAC.

Methods

A multicenter, cooperative group, single-arm, phase II trial was conducted between April 2009 and November 2013 (ACOSOG Z5041). Patients with biopsy-confirmed PDAC in the pancreatic head without evidence of involvement of major mesenteric vessels (resectable) were eligible. Patients (n = 123) received an 8-week cycle of G+E before and after surgery. The primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included toxicity, response, resection rate, and time to progression. Resectability was assessed retrospectively by central review. The study closed early due to slow accrual, and no formal hypothesis testing was performed.

Results

Overall, 114 patients were eligible, consented, and initiated protocol treatment. By central radiologic review, 97 (85%) of the 114 patients met the protocol-defined resectability criteria. Grade 3+ toxicity was reported in 60% and 79% of patients during the neoadjuvant phase and overall, respectively. Twenty-two of 114 (19%) patients did not proceed to surgery; 83 patients (73%) were successfully resected. R0 and R1 margins were obtained in 67 (81%) and 16 (19%) resected patients, respectively, and 54 patients completed postoperative G+E (65%). The 2-year OS rate for the entire cohort (n = 114) was 40% (95% confidence interval [CI] 31–50), with a median OS of 21.3 months (95% CI 17.2–25.9). The 2-year OS rate for resected patients (n = 83) was 52% (95% CI 41–63), with a median OS of 25.4 months (95% CI 21.8–29.6).

Conclusions

For resectable PDAC, perioperative G+E is feasible. Further evaluation of neoadjuvant strategies in resectable PDAC is warranted with more active systemic regimens.

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank T.J. FitzGerald, MD, and staff at IROC Rhode Island [formerly the Quality Assurance Review Center (QARC)], especially Sandra Kessel and Deirdre Logan, for their support in acquisition of the diagnostic imaging and facilitation of the radiologic review. The following institutions enrolled patients to this study: University Health Network–Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center at NYU Langone, Vanderbilt University/Ingram Cancer Center, University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer Center, UC Irvine Health/Chao Family Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical College of Wisconsin, Memorial Sloan Kettering Medical Center, MD Anderson Cancer Center, West Virginia University Healthcare, University of Tennessee–Knoxville, Providence Portland Medical Center, Carolinas Medical Center/Levine Cancer Institute, UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, Lakeland Regional Health Hollis Cancer Center, Ochsner Medical Center Jefferson, Saint Peter’s Health Partners, Piedmont Hospital, Henry Ford Hospital, University of Mississippi Medical Center, Kaiser Permanente Los Angeles Medical Center, Nebraska Methodist Hospital, Natalie Warren Bryant Cancer Center at Saint Francis, Loma Linda University Medical Center, Providence Sacred Heart Medical Center and Children’s Hospital, UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, Saint Luke’s University Hospital–Bethlehem Campus, University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics, Good Samaritan Hospital–Dayton, Miami Valley Hospital, Spartanburg Medical Center, and St. Vincent’s Medical Center.

Funding

Research reported in this publication was supported by the National Institutes of Health under award numbers U10CA180821 and U10CA180882 (to the Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology), U10CA180791, U10CA180836, U10CA180858, and U10CA180867, U24CA180803 (IROC), and U10CA29511 (QARC). This work was also supported in part by funds from OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.

Supplementary material

10434_2019_7685_MOESM1_ESM.docx (85 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 85 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Oettle H, Neuhaus P, Hochhaus A, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and long-term outcomes among patients with resected pancreatic cancer: the CONKO-001 randomized trial. JAMA. 2013;310(14):1473–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Neoptolemos JP, Palmer DH, Ghaneh P, et al. Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. The Lancet. 2017;389(10073):1011–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Neoptolemos JP, Stocken DD, Bassi C, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy with fluorouracil plus folinic acid vs gemcitabine following pancreatic cancer resection: a randomized controlled trial. The Journal of the American Medical Association. 2010;304(10):1073–81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Van Tienhoven G, Versteijne E, Suker M, et al. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-1): a randomized, controlled, multicenter phase III trial. Paper presented at the ASCO Annual Meeting, 1–5 Jun 2018; Chicago (IL).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chatzizacharias NA, Tsai S, Griffin M, et al. Locally advanced pancreas cancer: staging and goals of therapy. Surgery. 2018;163(5):1053–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim EJ, Ben-Josef E, Herman JM, et al. A multi-institutional phase 2 study of neoadjuvant gemcitabine and oxaliplatin with radiation therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer. Cancer. 2013;119(15):2692–700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Assifi MM, Lu X, Eibl G, Reber HA, Li G, Hines OJ. Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of phase II trials. Surgery. 2011;150(3):466–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blazer M, Wu C, Goldberg RM, et al. Neoadjuvant modified (m) FOLFIRINOX for locally advanced unresectable (LAPC) and borderline resectable (BRPC) adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(4):1153–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jensen EH, Armstrong L, Lee C, et al. Neoadjuvant interferon-based chemoradiation for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreas cancer: a phase II pilot study. HPB (Oxford). 2014;16(2):131–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    O’Reilly EM, Perelshteyn A, Jarnagin WR, et al. A single-arm, nonrandomized phase II trial of neoadjuvant gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with resectable pancreas adenocarcinoma. Ann Surg. 2014;260(1):142–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Murphy JE, Wo JY, Ryan DP, et al. Total neoadjuvant therapy with folfirinox followed by individualized chemoradiotherapy for borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase 2 clinical trial. JAMA Oncology. 2018;4(7):963–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, 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(15):1960–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Staley CA, Cleary KR, Abbruzzese JL, et al. The need for standardized pathologic staging of pancreaticoduodenectomy specimens. Pancreas. 1996;12(4):373–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Labori KJ, Katz MH, Tzeng CW, et al. Impact of early disease progression and surgical complications on adjuvant chemotherapy completion rates and survival in patients undergoing the surgery first approach for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma—A population-based cohort study. Acta oncologica. 2016;55(3):265–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bergquist JR, Ivanics T, Shubert CR, et al. Type of resection (whipple vs. distal) does not affect the national failure to provide post-resection adjuvant chemotherapy in localized pancreatic cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(6):1731–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Khorana AA, Mangu PB, Berlin J, et al. Potentially curable pancreatic cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(21):2541–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Katz MH, Shi Q, Ahmad SA, et al. Preoperative modified FOLFIRINOX treatment followed by capecitabine-based chemoradiation for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: alliance for clinical trials in oncology trial A021101. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(8):e161137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Katz MH, Marsh R, Herman JM, et al. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: need for standardization and methods for optimal clinical trial design. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(8):2787–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Palmer DH, Stocken DD, Hewitt H, et al. A randomized phase 2 trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: gemcitabine alone versus gemcitabine combined with cisplatin. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(7):2088–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    de W March R, Talamonti MS, Baker MS, et al. Primary systemic therapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using mFOLFIRINOX: a pilot study. J Surg Oncol. 2018;117(3):354–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Neuhaus P, Riess H, Post S, et al. CONKO-001: final results of the randomized, prospective, multicenter phase III trial of adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine versus observation in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (PC). J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(15 Suppl):LBA4504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M, et al. FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(19):1817–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Von Hoff DD, Ervin T, Arena FP, et al. Increased survival in pancreatic cancer with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. N Engl J Med. 2013;369(18):1691–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Conroy T, Hammel P, Hebbar M, et al. FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine as adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(25):2395–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Margaret AT, Dana Backlund C, David G, et al. APACT: Phase III randomized trial of adjuvant treatment with nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) versus Gem alone in patients (pts) with resected pancreatic cancer (PC). J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(4 Suppl):TPS473.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Katz MHG, Ou FS, Herman JM, et al. Alliance for clinical trials in oncology (ALLIANCE) trial A021501: preoperative extended chemotherapy vs. chemotherapy plus hypofractionated radiation therapy for borderline resectable adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas. BMC Cancer. 2017;17(1):505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alice C. Wei
    • 1
    • 12
    Email author
  • Fang-Shu Ou
    • 2
  • Qian Shi
    • 2
  • Xiomara Carrero
    • 2
  • Eileen M. O’Reilly
    • 3
  • Jeffrey Meyerhardt
    • 4
  • Robert A. Wolff
    • 5
  • Hedy L. Kindler
    • 6
  • Douglas B. Evans
    • 7
  • Vikram Deshpande
    • 8
  • Joseph Misdraji
    • 8
  • Eric Tamm
    • 5
  • Dushyant Sahani
    • 8
  • Malcolm Moore
    • 1
  • Elliot Newman
    • 9
  • Nipun Merchant
    • 10
  • Jordan Berlin
    • 11
  • Laura W. Goff
    • 11
  • Peter Pisters
    • 5
  • Mitchell C. Posner
    • 6
  1. 1.University Health Network–Princess Margaret HospitalTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Alliance Statistics and Data CenterMayo ClinicRochesterUSA
  3. 3.Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  4. 4.Dana-Farber/Partners Cancer CareBostonUSA
  5. 5.MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  6. 6.University of Chicago Comprehensive Cancer CenterChicagoUSA
  7. 7.Medical College of WisconsinMilwaukeeUSA
  8. 8.Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer CenterBostonUSA
  9. 9.New York University Langone Medical CenterNew YorkUSA
  10. 10.University of Miami Miller School of Medicine–Sylvester Cancer CenterMiamiUSA
  11. 11.Vanderbilt University Medical CenterNashvilleUSA
  12. 12.Department of SurgeryMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations