Saint Agnes Medical Center Oncology Symposium October 15, 2011 Neoadjuvant, Adjuvant and Palliative Management Marshall Flam, MD Hematology, Oncology Medical Group 00 01 yea r -0 4 s y 05 e a -0 rs 9 y 10 e a -1 rs 4 1 5 ye a -1 rs 9 y 20 e a -2 rs 4 2 5 ye a -2 rs 9 3 0 ye a -3 rs 4 y 35 e a -3 rs 9 4 0 ye a -4 rs 4 4 5 ye a -4 rs 9 y 50 e a -5 rs 4 5 5 ye a -5 rs 9 6 0 ye a -6 rs 4 y 65 e a -6 rs 9 7 0 ye a -7 rs 4 y 75 e a -7 rs 9 8 0 ye a -8 rs 4 ye 85 ars + ye ar s Age Specific Incidence Rates of Pancreas Cancer, in California, by Race, 1988-2008 140 120 100 80 Rate/100,000 60 NH White rate 40 Black rate 20 0 Age at DX Courtesy of Paul Mills, PhD, MPH Stage at Diagnoses of PAC Stage at DX % of Patients 5 Yr. Survival Distant Metastases 50 2% Locally Advanced Un-resectable 30 7% Curative Resection of Operated 50 (10) 20% Metastases Found at Surgery Un-resectable 50 (10) SINGLE AGENT CHEMOTHERAPY Overall Survival: Gemcitabine vs 5-FU Fixed Dose Rate vs. Standard Rate Toxicity Summary Grade 3 and 4 Toxicities (% of Patients) Toxicity per Patient FDR Standard Anemia 23.3 20.9 37.2 18.4 14.3 10.2 48.8 39.5 7.3 4.7 26.5 22.5 2.2 8.2 Nausea/vomiting Thrombocytopenia Neutropenia Leukopenia ALT Diarrhea Abbreviation: FDR, fixed dose rate. Assessment of Clinical Benefit Analgesic Consumption Pain Intensity Performance Status PAIN Responder Improvement in both Parameters. Stable in one parameter, Improvement in The other parameter STABLE In both Parameters Non-responder Worsening in either Parameter WEIGHT Responder Responder > 7% Increase in body weight Stable or decreased weight COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY Phase III Trials of Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Regimen OS (mos) 5FU OS (mos) P Value RR (%) 5FU RR % Gemcitabine + 5FU 6.7 5.4 0.09 9.9 5.6 Gemcitabine + Irinotecan 6.3 6.6 0.789 16.1 4.4 Gemcitabine + Cisplatin 7.5 6 0.15 10.2 8.2 Gemcitabine + Oxaliplatin 9.0 7.1 0.13 26.8 17.3 Gemcitabine + Premetrexed 6.2 6.3 0.848 14.8 7.1 Capecitabine + Gemcitabine 7.4 6 0.026 14.0 7.0 EGOC Trail: Survival – Gemcitabine vs GEMOX French Trial: Survival Gemcitabine vs GEMOX Objective Responses in the Intention-to-Treat Population Progression-free Survival Overall Survival TARGETED THERAPIES Summary of the CAN-NCIC PA.3 Phase III Trial Gemcitabine +Erlotinib vs Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Gemcitabine + Erlotinib No. of Patients Response Rate Median Survival 1 Yr. Survival Rate Progression-Free Survival 285 8.6% 6.24 mos 23% Gemcitabine Alone Hazard Ratio P Value 284 ----- ------8.0% ----- ------5.91 mos 0.82 .038 17% ----- ------- 3.75 mos 3.55 mos 0.77 .004 Data from Moore et al.23,24 Phase III Trial of Bevacizumba + Gemcitabine in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Median Overall and Progression-Free Survival Gemcitabine + Bevacizumab Median Overall Survival (95% CI) Progression-Free Survival (95% CI) Gemcitabine + Placebo 5.7 mos 6.0 mos (4.9, 6.5) (5.0, 6.9) 4.8 mos 4.3 mos (4.3, 5.7) (3.8, 5.6) P Value 0.40 ----0.99 ----- Hazard Ratio 1.09 ------1.0 ------- Data from Kindler et al.11 SECOND LINE THERAPIES Clinical Trials Investigating second-line combination chemotherapy in gemcitabinepretreated patients with advanced pancreatic cancer Treatment Regimen No. of patients Metastatic Disease (%) RR (%)a DCR (%)a PFS/TTP (months) OS (months) Oxa/5-FU CI/LV vs. BSC14 46 NA NA NA OFF: 5.25 BSC: 2.5 OFF: 10 BSC: 8.5 Oxa/5-FU CI/LV vs. 5-FU CI/LV36, 27 168 OFF: 85.5 FF: 89.2 NA NA OFF: 3.25 FF: 2.25 OFF: 6.5 FF: 3.25 Oxa/5-FU CI/LV28 30 97 23 53 5.1 5.8 FOLFOX-429 42 83 14 52 4 6.7 Modified FOLFOX(a) vs. modified FOLFIRI.3(b)30 (a) 30 (b) 30 NA NA (a) 20 (b) 28 (a) 1.4 (b) 1.9 (a) 4 (b) 4 Oxa/5-FU CI31 18 94.5 0 17 0.9 1.3 Oxa + Gem33 33 64 21 58 4.2 6.0 Oxa + Cap34 39 NA 3 23 NA 5.8 Oxa + Cap36 15 100 7 40 4.1 10 Oxa + irinotecan37 30 100 10 33 4.1 5.9 Oxa + pemetrexed38 16 NA 20 60 3.3 NA Oxa + ralitrexed39 41 100 24 51 1.8 5.2 L-Cisplatin 24 79 8 67 NA 4.0 Cisplatin + irinotecan + Gem + 5-FU + LV41 34 100 34 55 3.9 10.3 Cisplatin + S-142 17 53 29 NA NA 9.0 Cap + Gem + docetaxel43 35 100 29 60 NA 11.2 Mitomycin + docetaxel + Irinotecan44 15 100 0 20 1.7 6.1 Irinotecan + ralitrexed18 19 100 16 47 4.0 6.5 + Gem40 a Intention-to-treat analysis. b KPS 80-100% (OFF:77; FF91) CONKO 003 Phase II trial of capecitabine + erlotinib in gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer ADJUVANT THERAPY FOLLOWING RESECTION OF PAC Key Trials of Adjuvant Therapy in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Trial GITSG (1985) Regimen 5FU + 40GY XRT Surgery Only GITSG (1987) EORTC (1999) 5FU + 40GY XRT 5FU + 40GY XRT Surgery Only # of Patients Median Survival (mos) 21 20 22 11 30 18 110 17.1 108 12.6 ESGCP (2004) Chemoradiotherapy 145 15.9 ESGCP (2004) No Chemoradiotherapy 144 17.9 Maintenance Chemotherapy 142 20.1 No Maintenance Chemotherapy 147 15.5 5FU + 50.4Gy 270 16.7 Gemcitabine + 5FU + 50.4Gy 268 18.8* Gemcitabine 179 22.1 177 20.2 RTOG (2006) CONKO-001 (2007) Surgery Only * Statistically Significant NEO-ADJUVANT (PRE-OPERATIVE) THERAPY Advantages Pre-operative Chemo radiation over Post-operative Chemo radiation More effective chemotherapy delivery with an intact blood supply Avoidance of hypoxia related chemo radiation resistance Avoidance of late radiation toxicity by surgical removal of irradiated duodenum and use of unirradiated jejunum use in reconstruction Immediate use of systemic therapy for a disease that is systemic at diagnosis in the majority of patients Improved patient selection for pancreatic surgery Pancreatic surgery is safer following chemo radiation due to reduced risk of pancreatic anastomotic leak due to pancreatic fibrosis Timely access to therapy. No delays due to post-operative recovery complications Increases R0 (complete) resection rates in patients with borderline resectable tumors Operability Classification of Localized PAC based on high-quality cross-sectional imaging Resectable Borderline Resectable Locally Advanced Metastatic Selected Trials of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation for Patients with Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Author Evaluable Patients EBRT Dose (Gy) Resected Chemotherapy Regimen Median Survival All Patients (Mo) Median Survival Resected Patients (Mo) Evans et al. (119) 28 17 (61%) 50.4 + IORT CI 5-FU NA 18 Hoffman et al. (121) 53 24 (45%) 50.4 Bolus 5-FU 9.7 15.7 Pisters et al. (120 35 20 (57%) 30 + IORT PVI 5-FU 7 25 White et al. 53 resectable 28 (53%) 45 PVI 5-FU NR NR Moutardier et al (261) 19 15 (79%) 30 or 45 Bolus 5-FU + CDDP 20 30 Arnoletti et al (262) 26 14 (54%) 59.4 5-FU and/or MMC or NA 34 Gem Pisters et al. (123) 35 20 (57%) 30 and 10 IORT Paclitaxel 12 19 Wolff et al. (125) 86 64 (75%) 30 Gem 22 36 Magnin et al. (263) 32 19 (59)% 30 or 45 PVI 5-FU + CDDP 16 30 Talamonti et al. (126) 20 17 (85%) 36 Gy Gem NA NA Kaplan-Meier curves compare overall survival in patients according to timing of systemic therapy. MS indicate medial survival. Kaplan Meier curves compare overall survival in patients with extra pancreatic disease (ie, T3 or T4 Disease) according to timing of sytematic therapy. MS indicates median survival. Add Title Need Title Survival adjusted for age, sex, and comorbidity for patients receiving treatment versus untreated patients. Need Title Kaplan-Meier overall survival curves in patients with good Karnofsky performance score (90 to 100). Gem, gemcitabine; GemCap, Gemcitabine plus capecitabine.