| 1. |
- Labori, Knut Jørgen, et al.
(författare)
-
Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1) : a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. - : The Lancet Group. - 2468-1253. ; 9:3, s. 205-217
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundIn patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.MethodsNORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing.FindingsBetween Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49–71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62–84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2–34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6–not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00–2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46–67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55–83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2–34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4–not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99–2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event.InterpretationThis phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven.
|
|
| 2. |
- Labori, Knut Jørgen, et al.
(författare)
-
Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1) : a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial
- 2024
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology. - : Elsevier. - 2468-1253. ; 9:3, s. 205-217
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: In patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.Methods: NORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing.Findings: Between Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49–71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62–84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2–34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6–not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00–2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46–67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55–83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2–34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4–not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99–2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event.Interpretation: This phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven.
|
|
| 3. |
- Andersson, Thomas K., et al.
(författare)
-
PACADI: translation and adaptation of a Swedish-language version of the pancreatic cancer disease impact score
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Bmc Research Notes. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 1756-0500. ; 15:1
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective The Norwegian pancreatic cancer disease impact score (PACADI) is a digitalized analogue questionnaire that assesses different disease-specific symptoms. There is a need of translations of it into other languages. Therefore, the aim of this article is to describe the translation process of a Swedish version of PACADI and present its validity to EORCT QLQ PAN26. The self-administered questionnaire PACADI was translated according to guidelines and assessed by an expert panel of health care personnel. The test of its validity was performed with the disease-specific questionnaire for EORCT QLQ PAN26. Both questionnaires were completed by 66 subjects with pancreatic cancer, either before, at discharge or three months after surgery. Result The results between the groups indicate that patients suffer from different symptoms at different times. The correlations between the different symptoms of the two questionnaires were fair to good. In conclusion, PACADI and QLQ PAN 26 have a good correlation and PACADI can be used in clinical practise.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Bratlie, Svein-Olav, et al.
(författare)
-
Proteomic Approach to the Potential Role of Angiotensin II in Barrett Dysplasia
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Proteomics - Clinical Applications. - : Wiley. - 1862-8346 .- 1862-8354. ; 13:4
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and Aim: Dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) is regarded as a preneoplastic lesion. The renin–angiotensin system (RAS), known for its role in electrolyte homeostasis and hemodynamics, has also been shown to have tissue-based features linked to proliferation, inflammation, and cancer. RAS is associated with BE dysplasia. The aim of this study is to investigate possible effects of the RAS in BE dysplasia by using RAS-interfering pharmaceutical agents and by assessment of global protein expression in esophageal mucosal biopsies. Methods: Endoscopic biopsies are taken from 18 BE in patients with low-grade dysplasia before and after 3 weeks of treatment with either angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (enalapril 5 mg; n = 6) or angiotensin II receptor type 1 blockers (candesartan 8 mg; n = 6), or no treatment (n = 6). A global proteomics analysis by 2D gel electrophoresis and mass spectrometry (MS) is then performed to identify proteins that are regulated after interference with RAS. Results: Three proteins are identified to show significant modulation of expression 60 kDa heat shock protein (downregulated), protein disulfide isomerase A3 (downregulated), and inorganic pyrophosphatase (upregulated). Conclusion: Three proteins with no previously known links to esophageal RAS, but with possible relevance for the development of esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC) are detected. Altered expression by interference with the RAS suggests an involvement of angiotensin II in the development of EAC in BE. © 2019 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
|
|
| 6. |
- Bratlie, Svein-Olav, et al.
(författare)
-
Resectable, borderline, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer-"the good, the bad, and the ugly" candidates for surgery?
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Journal of Gastrointestinal Oncology. - : AME Publishing Company. - 2078-6891 .- 2219-679X. ; 12:5, s. 2450-2460
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The possibility of surgical resection strongly overrules medical oncologic treatment and is the only modality, causa sine qua non, long-term survival can be achieved in patients with pancreatic cancer. For this reason, the clinical classification of local resectability, subdividing tumors into resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced cancer, that is very technical in nature, is the one most widely used and accepted. As multimodality treatment with potent agents, particularly in the neoadjuvant setting, seems to be stepping forward as the new standard of treatment of pancreatic cancer, the established technical surgical landmarks tend to get challenged. This review aims to highlight the grey zones in the current classifications for local tumor involvement with respect to the observed patient outcome in the current multimodality treatment era. It summarizes the latest reported series on the outcome of resected primary resectable, borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer, and particularly vascular resections during pancreatectomy, in the background of different types of neoadjuvant therapy. It also hints what the new horizons of cancer biology tend to reveal whenever the technical hinders start being pushed aside. The current calls for the necessity of re-classification of the clinical categories of pancreatic cancer, from technically oriented to biology-focused individualized approach, are being elucidated.
|
|
| 7. |
- Bratlie, Svein-Olav, et al.
(författare)
-
Support for involvement of the renin-angiotensin system in dysplastic Barrett's esophagus
- 2017
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0036-5521 .- 1502-7708. ; 52:3, s. 338-343
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background and aim: Patients with dysplasia in Barrett's esophagus (BE) have a considerable risk of developing esophageal adenocarcinoma (EAC). The mucosal expression of the pro-inflammatory angiotensin II receptor type 1 (AT1R) is elevated in these patients, suggesting a role in carcinogenesis. The purpose of this study was to determine whether interference with the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) would influence downstream markers of carcinogenesis.Methods: Endoscopic mucosal biopsies from BE patients with low-grade dysplasia (LGD) were sampled before and after a three-week period of RAS-interfering treatment. Thirty patients were randomly allocated to enalapril (ACE inhibitor, 5mg od), candesartan (AT1R antagonist, 8mg od), or no drug. The expression of 12 proteins known to be associated with RAS and carcinogenesis was assessed using western blot.Results: We found altered expression of several proteins after enalapril treatment (decreased: NFB, p=.043; NLRP3, p=.050; AMACR, p=.017; and caspase 3, p=.025; increased: p53, p=.050). Candesartan treatment was associated with increased iNOS expression (p=.033). No significant changes were seen in the no-drug group.Conclusion: Interference with angiotensin II formation was associated with altered expression of inflammation- and carcinogenesis-related proteins. The present results speak in favor of involvement of angiotensin II in BE dysplasia, but the role of AT1R should be investigated further.
|
|
| 8. |
- Bratlie, Svein-Olav, et al.
(författare)
-
The renin–angiotensin system in Barrett’s esophagus
- 2016
-
Ingår i: Scandinavian Journal of Gastroenterology. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0036-5521 .- 1502-7708. ; 51:9978, s. 1037-1042
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- ABSTRACT Objective: Barrett’s esophagus (BE) is a risk factor for esophageal adenocarcinoma. In addition to its classical endocrine character known for hemodynamic regulation, the renin–angiotensin system (RAS) can be associated with inflammation, wound healing, and cancer. The aim of this study was to explore a potential expression of the RAS in BE, with or without the presence of dysplasia. Material and methods: Biopsy material was prepared for western blotting and immunohistochemistry. Non-BE patients (controls) were compared with BE patients regarding RAS in the squamous epithelium. In the columnar BE mucosa, RAS expression was studied in patients with and without dysplasia. Key components of the ‘classical’ RAS were assessed: the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) and the angiotensin II subtype 1 and 2 receptors (AT1R and AT2R). Results: The presence of RAS factors was confirmed in the esophageal mucosa of both control and BE patients. ACE protein expression was 48% lower (p1⁄40.001) whereas AT1R was 45% higher (p1⁄40.039) in the squamous epithelium of BE patients compared to epithelia from non-BE controls. In the meta- plastic intestinal-like epithelium, AT1R expression was 37% higher in BE patients with confirmed dyspla- sia than in patients without dysplasia (p 1⁄4 0.009). Immunohistochemistry showed an altered distribution of RAS proteins in BE patients with dysplasia. Conclusions: The differential RAS expression observed may prove to be useful as a biomarker or a pharmaceutical target.
|
|
| 9. |
- Johansen, Karin, et al.
(författare)
-
Preoperative Biliary Drainage Does Not Independently Reduce Survival After Pancreaticoduodenectomy Among Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma : A National Registry Study
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Annals of Surgery Open: perspectives of surgical history, education, and clinical approaches. - : Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins. - 2691-3593. ; 2:3
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Objective: This study aimed to explore a possible relationship between preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) and overall survival in a national cohort of Swedish patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Background: PBD has been shown to increase postoperative complications after PD, but its use is steadily increasing. There are a few small studies that have indicated that PBD might in itself negatively affect overall survival after PD. Methods: Patients from the Swedish National Registry for tumors in the pancreatic and periampullary region diagnosed from 2010 to 2019 who underwent PD for PDAC were included. Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests and Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to investigate survival. Results: Out of 15,818 patients in the registry, 3113 had undergone PD, of whom 1471 had a histopathological diagnosis of PDAC. Patients who had undergone PBD had significantly worse survival, but the effect of PBD disappeared in the multivariable analysis when elevated bilirubin at any time was included. Conclusions: PBD does not independently influence survival after PD for PDAC, but this study implies that even a nominally increased preoperative bilirubin level might impair long-term survival.
|
|
| 10. |
- Korrel, Maarten, et al.
(författare)
-
Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer (DIPLOMA): an international randomised non-inferiority trial
- 2023
-
Ingår i: The Lancet Regional Health. - : ELSEVIER. - 2666-7762. ; 31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The oncological safety of minimally invasive surgery has been questioned for several abdominal cancers. Concerns also exist regarding the use of minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer as randomised trials are lacking. Methods In this international randomised non-inferiority trial, we recruited adults with resectable pancreatic cancer from 35 centres in 12 countries. Patients were randomly assigned to either MIDP (laparoscopic or robotic) or open distal pancreatectomy (ODP). Both patients and pathologists were blinded to the assigned approach. Primary endpoint was radical resection (R0, & GE;1 mm free margin) in patients who had ultimately undergone resection. Analyses for the primary endpoint were by modified intention-to-treat, excluding patients with missing data on primary endpoint. The pre-defined non-inferiority margin of -7% was compared with the lower limit of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) of absolute difference in the primary endpoint. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry (ISRCTN44897265). Findings Between May 8, 2018 and May 7, 2021, 258 patients were randomly assigned to MIDP (131 patients) or ODP (127 patients). Modified intention-to-treat analysis included 114 patients in the MIDP group and 110 patients in the ODP group. An R0 resection occurred in 83 (73%) patients in the MIDP group and in 76 (69%) patients in the ODP group (difference 3.7%, 90% CI -6.2 to 13.6%; pnon-inferiority = 0.039). Median lymph node yield was comparable (22.0 [16.0-30.0] vs 23.0 [14.0-32.0] nodes, p = 0.86), as was the rate of intraperitoneal recurrence (41% vs 38%, p = 0.45). Median follow-up was 23.5 (interquartile range 17.0-30.0) months. Other postoperative outcomes were comparable, including median time to functional recovery (5 [95% CI 4.5-5.5] vs 5 [95% CI 4.7-5.3] days; p = 0.22) and overall survival (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.67-1.46, p = 0.94). Serious adverse events were reported in 23 (18%) of 131 patients in the MIDP group vs 28 (22%) of 127 patients in the ODP group. Interpretation This trial provides evidence on the non-inferiority of MIDP compared to ODP regarding radical resection rates in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The present findings support the applicability of minimally invasive surgery in patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer. Funding Medtronic Covidien AG, Johnson & Johnson Medical Limited, Dutch Gastroenterology Society. Copyright & COPY; 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
|
|
