Metastatic pancreatic cancer: Is there a light at the end of the tunnel?

Due to extremely poor prognosis,pancreatic cancer(PDAC)represents the fourth leading cause of cancerrelated death in Western countries.For more than a decade,gemcitabine(Gem)has been the mainstay of first-line PDAC treatment.Many efforts aimed at improving single-agent Gem efficacy by either combining it with a second cytotoxic/molecularly targeted agent or pharmacokinetic modulation provided disappointing results.Recently,the field of systemic therapy of advanced PDAC is finally moving forward.Polychemotherapy has shown promise over single-agent Gem:regimens like PEFG-PEXG-PDXG and GTX provide significant potential advantages in terms of survival and/or disease control,although sometimes at the cost of poor tolerability.The PRODIGE 4/ACCORD 11 was the first phaseⅢtrial to provide unequivocal benefit using the polychemotherapy regimen FOLFIRINOX;however the less favorable safety profile and the characteristics of the enrolled population,restrict the use of FOLFIRINOX to young and fit PDAC patients.The nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel(nab-Paclitaxel)formulation was developed to overcome resistance due to the desmoplastic stroma surrounding pancreatic cancer cells.Regardless of whether or not this is its main mechanisms of action,the combination of nabPaclitaxel plus Gem showed a statistically and clinically significant survival advantage over single agent Gem and significantly improved all the secondary endpoints.Furthermore,recent findings on maintenance therapy are opening up potential new avenues in the treatment of advanced PDAC,particularly in a new era in which highly effective first-line regimens allow patients to experience prolonged disease control.Here,we provide an overview of recent advances in the systemic treatment of advanced PDAC,mostly focusing on recent findings that have set new standards in metastatic disease.Potential avenues for further development in the metastatic setting and current efforts to integratenew effective chemotherapy regimens in earlier stages of disease(neoadjuvant,adjuvant,and multimodal approaches in both resectable and unresectable patients)are also briefly discussed.

First-line erlotinib and fixed dose-rate gemcitabine for advanced pancreatic cancer

AIM: To investigate activity, toxicity, and prognostic factors for survival of erlotinib and fixed dose-rate gemcitabine (FDR-Gem) in advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We designed a single-arm prospective, multicentre, open-label phase Ⅱ study to evaluate the combination of erlotinib (100 mg/d, orally) and weekly FDR-Gem (1000 mg/m 2 , infused at 10 mg/m 2 per minute) in a population of previously untreated patients with locally advanced, inoperable, or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Primary endpoint was the rate of progression-free survival at 6 mo (PFS-6); secondary endpoints were overall response rate (ORR), response duration, tolerability, overall survival (OS), and clinical benefit. Treatment was not considered to be of further interest if the PFS-6 was < 20% (p0 = 20%), while a PFS-6 > 40% would be of considerable interest (p1 = 40%); with a 5% rejection error (α = 5%) and a power of 80%, 35 fully evaluable patients with metastatic disease were required to be enrolled in order to complete the study. Analysis of prognostic factors for survival was also carried out. RESULTS: From May 2007 to September 2009, 46 patients were enrolled (male/female: 25/21; median age: 64 years; median baseline carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9): 897 U/mL; locally advanced/metastatic disease: 5/41). PFS-6 and median PFS were 30.4% and 14 wk (95%CI: 10-19), respectively; 1-year and median OS were 20.2% and 26 wk (95%CI: 8-43). Five patients achieved an objective response (ORR: 10.9%, 95%CI: 1.9-19.9); disease control rate was 56.5% (95%CI: 42.2-70.8); clinical benefit rate was 43.5% (95%CI: 29.1-57.8). CA 19-9 serum levels were decreased by > 25% as compared to baseline in 14/23 evaluable patients (63.6%). Treatment was well-tolerated, with skin rash being the most powerful predictor of both longer PFS (P < 0.0001) and OS (P = 0.01) at multivariate analysis (median OS for patients with or without rash: 42 wk vs 15 wk, respectively, Log-rank P = 0.03). Additional predictors of better outcome were: CA 19-9 reduction, female sex (for PFS), and good performance status (for OS). CONCLUSION: Primary study endpoint was not met. However, skin rash strongly predicted erlotinib efficacy, suggesting that a pharmacodynamic-based strategy for patient selection deserves further investigation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical trials implementing aromatase inhibitors to treat male infertility

Aromatase activity has commonly been associated with male infertility characterized by testicular dysfunction with low serum testosterone and/or testosterone to estradiol ratio.In this subset of patients,and particularly in those with hypogonadism,elevated levels of circulating estradiol may establish a negative feedback on the hypothalamic–pituitary–testicular axis by suppressing follicle-stimulating hormone(FSH)and luteinizing hormone(LH)production and impaired spermatogenesis.Hormonal manipulation via different agents such as selective estrogen modulators or aromatase inhibitors to increase endogenous testosterone production and improve spermatogenesis in the setting of infertility is an off-label option for treatment.We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature of the past 30 years in order to evaluate the benefits of the use of aromatase inhibitors in the medical management of infertile/hypoandrogenic males.Overall,eight original articles were included and critically evaluated.Either steroidal(Testolactone)or nonsteroidal(Anastrozole and Letrozole)aromatase inhibitors were found to statistically improve all the evaluated hormonal and seminal outcomes with a safe tolerability profile.While the evidence is promising,future prospective randomized placebo-controlled multicenter trials are necessary to better define the efficacy of these medications.