CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home »

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 22 No. 11
The Duffy/O’Reilly Article Reviewed 

Challenges on the Road to Treatment Advances for Pancreatic Cancer

By Mary F. Mulcahy, MD
Assistant Professor of Medicine
Division of Hematology/Oncology

Al B. Benson III, MD
Professor of Medicine
Division of Hematology/Oncology
Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of
Northwestern University
Chicago, Illinois

| October 1, 2008
Dr. Benson has received research funding from and is a scientific advisor for Eli Lilly.

Localized pancreatic cancer, whether resectable or unresectable, is a separate entity from metastatic pancreatic cancer. Multiple studies have demonstrated that even in the setting of unresectable disease, the progression-free and overall survival of patients with localized pancreatic cancer exceeds that associated with metastatic pancreatic cancer.[1,2] Regardless of tumor size and vascular involvement, the presence or absence of metastases is the greatest prognostic indicator. The article by Duffy and O’Reilly addresses the unique entity of localized pancreatic cancer.

Clinical Trials and Preclinical Models

(MORE: What Is the Optimal Treatment of Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma?)

The clinical trials that have led to the current treatment of pancreatic cancer are largely based on concepts extrapolated from other diseases. The molecular heterogeneity of pancreatic cancer, including the abundant genetic and epigenetic changes, and the contribution of the stromal elements require a distinct approach.

In 2007, the National Institutes of Health sponsored a pancreatic cancer State of the Science meeting to address these important issues in an attempt to understand human pancreatic cancer biology and develop new paradigms of translational clinical research. The issues addressed included the need to (1) identify critical questions and prioritize key strategies and concepts to test; (2) identity cell and stromal-associated signaling pathways that are targets for new drug development; (3) determine how best to utilize preclinical models to identify and test targeted therapy and predictable biomarkers; (4) identify appropriate endpoints and statistical designs for pilot studies; (5) facilitate innovation and collaboration among physician/scientists.

Preclinical models mimicking pancreatic cancer have been challenging. In vitro cell systems may identify drug mechanism of action, but are insufficient to identify the multifarious interactions with the cell stroma and stem cell signaling. The use of orthotopically implanted or genetically engineered tumor models offer a better predictor of clinical activity but still may not be representative of the complex microenvironment of human pancreatic cancer.

Using all of these model systems, as well as high-throughput screens, knockout models, and phosphoproteomics, candidate genes that are mutated or overexpressed in high frequency can establish a genetic signature for human pancreatic cancer. It is feasible that the genetic signature of a localized pancreatic cancer may differ from one that is either clinically localized with subclinical metastases or frankly metastatic. This distinction would clearly identify a population that may benefit from intensive local therapy.

Role of Radiation Therapy

The authors accurately summarize the controversy regarding radiation therapy for localized pancreatic cancer, both in the adjuvant setting and as definitive therapy. To better define the role of radiation as adjuvant therapy, special attention needs to be applied to standardization of the surgical margin status and the radiation fields.

The evaluation of radiation as a component of definitive therapy for locally advanced disease is hampered by the lack of surrogate response markers. Radiographic measures of response are not easily reproducible and offer a poor surrogate for survival. Functional imaging or changes in biomarkers have not been validated as surrogate endpoints for early-phase studies. Despite these deficiencies and challenges, determining the benefit of radiation therapy for localized pancreatic cancer was not considered a high priority while systemic control of disease is so inadequate.

Biologic Diversity

As noted by the authors, localized pancreatic cancer can potentially be a great source of knowledge in understanding tumor cell biology. Maintaining tumor biorepositories of resected pancreatic cancer, stromal tissue, and germline DNA for patients on adjuvant therapy protocols may aid in identifying important prognostic and predictive markers. Using a neoadjuvant treatment approach for resectable pancreatic cancer, important signaling relationships between the stromal tissue and tumor tissue may be uncovered as well as the interaction with pancreatic stem cell signaling. The creation of an ideal reference set for tissue sampling based on high-quality tissue and improved access and sharing of existing biorepositories are critical to the advancement of the field, especially in regard to biomarker validation and drug development.

While it is important to recognize localized pancreatic cancer as a separate entity, the biologic diversity of pancreatic cancer presents challenges for all stages of disease. Surgical resection of resectable pancreatic cancer has evolved to a level that is safe with acceptable morbidity and mortality when preformed at high-volume centers. The recently completed portfolio of trials in the adjuvant (Radiation Therapy Oncology Group [RTOG] 9704 and Charité Onkologie [CONKO] 001),[3,4] locally advanced (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] 4201),[5] and advanced (Cancer and Leukemia Group B [CALGB], Southwest Oncology Group [SWOG] 0205, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group [ECOG] 6201, National Cancer Institute of Canada [NCIC])[1,2,6,7] disease settings have failed to advance the field beyond the suboptimal benefits of gemcitabine(Drug information on gemcitabine) (Gemzar). Further benefits will only be gained through improved systemic therapies; however, traditional phase II paradigms have proven inadequate to justify moving forward to phase III trials.

In the end, unless we can understand the biology of the stroma-tumor interaction, it will be difficult to identify targeted therapeutic strategies. That said, the roadmap created by the investigators at the State of the Science meeting will provide a structure with which to achieve advances in the treatment and cure of pancreatic cancer.

—Mary F. Mulcahy, MD
—Al B. Benson III, MD

This commentary refers to the following article: What Is the Optimal Treatment of Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma?

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.

This commentary refers to the following article

What Is the Optimal Treatment of Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma?





References

1. Kindler HL, Niedzwiecki D, Hollis D, et al, for the Cancer and Leukemia Group B: A double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase III trial of gemcitabine (G) plus bevacizumab (B) versus gemcitabine plus placebo (P) in patients (pts) with advanced pancreatic cancer (PC): A preliminary analysis of Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) (abstract 4508). J Clin Oncol 25(18S):199s, 2007.
2. Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J, et al, for the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group: 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 25:1960-1966, 2007.
3. Regine WF, Winter KA, Abrams RA, et al: Fluorouracil vs gemcitabine chemotherapy before and after fluorouracil-based chemoradiation following resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A randomized controlled trial. JAMA 299:1019-1026, 2008.
4. Oettle H, Post S, Neuhaus P, et al: Adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine vs observation in patients undergoing curative-intent resection of pancreatic cancer: A randomized controlled triall. JAMA 297:267-277, 2007.
5. Loehrer PJ, Powell ME, Cardenes HR, et al, for the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group: A randomized phase III study of gemcitabine in combination with radiation therapy versus gemcitabine alone in patients with localized, unresectable pancreatic cancer: E4201 (abstract 4506). J Clin Oncol 26(15S):214s, 2008.
6. Philip PA, Benedetti J, Fenoglio-Preiser J, et al: Phase III study of gemcitabine [G] plus cetuximab [C] versus gemcitabine in patients [pts] with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma [PC]: SWOG S0205 study (abstract LBA4509). J Clin Oncol 25(18S):199s, 2007.
7. Poplin E, Levy DE, Berlin J, et al: Phase III trial of gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) versus gemcitabine (fixed-dose-rate infusion[FDR]) versus gemcitabine + oxaliplatin(GEMOX) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (E6201) (abstract LBA4004). J Clin Oncol 24(18S):180s, 2006.


 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
IMAGE IQ

A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
Brian Morse, MD1 , June 10, 2013

A 48-year-old female presents with complaints of irregular vaginal bleeding and postcoital bleeding. Images from a PET/CT and pelvis MRI reveal characteristic findings. What is your diagnosis?

More Image IQs 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Key Differences between FQHCs and RHCs
Chastity Werner, RHIT, June 13, 2013
FQHCs and RHCs take up a unique niche among physician practices. And that affects compensation and billing.
Improving Care Coordination in Your Practice
Susanne Madden,  June 12, 2013
Practices are feverishly working to control the rising costs of healthcare - effective care coordination can help.
Refunding Overpayments: Two Options for Medical Practices
Ericka L. Adler,  June 12, 2013
Medicare and Medicaid providers must return overpayments once identified. Here are two different refund approaches for practices to consider when necessary.
Four Easy Ways to Boost Patient Time of Service Collections
Aubrey Westgate,  June 12, 2013
Simple ways your medical practice staff can increase the likelihood patients will pay when presenting for appointments.
iPad Alternatives for Mobile Physicians
Marisa Torrieri, June 11, 2013
As more physicians are seeing the merits of media tablets, the market is expanding, too.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Papillary Thyroid Carcinoma
  • Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: Who Is Benefiting?
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • A 48-Year-Old Woman With Irregular Vaginal Bleeding
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • Cannabis Linked to Decreased Bladder Cancer Risk
  • Breast Cancer Screening, Risk, and Options for High-Risk Women
  • Rising PSA Level in a 46-Year-Old Man
  • ASCO: Long-Term Tamoxifen Benefit for Breast Cancer Confirmed
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Soluble HER2 Levels Prognostic Factor in HER2+ Breast Cancer
  • ASCO: PD-L1 Antibody Elicits Durable Response in RCC
  • RECORD-3: Sunitinib Still Standard First-Line Treatment in Metastatic RCC
  • ASCO: Dabrafenib Shows Activity in BRAF-Mutated NSCLC Patients
  • Preventing Burnout in Oncology
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
  • Preventing Exposure to Hazardous Drugs
  • ASCO: Vinegar Screening Significantly Reduces Cervical Cancer Mortality
  • ASCO: Sulforaphane in Prostate Cancer Found Worthy of Further Investigation
  • Study: Recurrent Heartburn Ups Risk for Throat Cancer
  • Radiation-Induced Enteritis: Incidence, Mechanisms, and Management
  • HER2-Directed Therapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer
  • Accelerated Partial-Breast Irradiation: The Current State of Our Knowledge
  • It’s Time for Clinicians to Reconsider Their Proscription Against the Use of Soyfoods by Breast Cancer Patients
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter



CancerNetwork on Facebook

CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy