PURPOSE: The role of local renin-angiotensin system (RAS) as a target for the treatment of pancreatic cancer has been increasingly reported, but the addition of candesartan, one of angiotensin system inhibitors (ASIs), to gemcitabine in our prospective trial failed to demonstrate activity against pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to explore subgroups that would benefit from the inhibition of RAS by the use of ASIs. METHODS: Consecutive patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were retrospectively studied. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by a Cox proportional hazards model. Interactions between the use of ASIs and each subgroup were tested. RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2013, 349 patients received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer; 232 were metastatic, 210 received gemcitabine monotherapy, 108 took ASIs, 166 were never smokers and 188 were diabetic. The median PFS and OS were 4.9 and 11.2 months, respectively. When the effects of the use of ASIs were evaluated by a Cox proportional hazard model, there were two subgroups with P interaction <0.10 both in PFS and OS: never smokers and gemcitabine monotherapy. HRs for PFS and OS by the inhibition of RAS were 0.71 (P = 0.021) and 0.68 (P = 0.014) in never smokers and 0.70 (P = 0.027) and 0.77 (P = 0.124) in patients receiving gemcitabine monotherapy. CONCLUSION: The inhibition of RAS in advanced pancreatic cancer might improve clinical outcomes in cases without a history of smoking or in cases receiving gemcitabine monotherapy.
PURPOSE: The role of local renin-angiotensin system (RAS) as a target for the treatment of pancreatic cancer has been increasingly reported, but the addition of candesartan, one of angiotensin system inhibitors (ASIs), to gemcitabine in our prospective trial failed to demonstrate activity against pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to explore subgroups that would benefit from the inhibition of RAS by the use of ASIs. METHODS: Consecutive patients with advanced pancreatic cancer receiving gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were retrospectively studied. Hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated by a Cox proportional hazards model. Interactions between the use of ASIs and each subgroup were tested. RESULTS: Between 2001 and 2013, 349 patients received gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer; 232 were metastatic, 210 received gemcitabine monotherapy, 108 took ASIs, 166 were never smokers and 188 were diabetic. The median PFS and OS were 4.9 and 11.2 months, respectively. When the effects of the use of ASIs were evaluated by a Cox proportional hazard model, there were two subgroups with P interaction <0.10 both in PFS and OS: never smokers and gemcitabine monotherapy. HRs for PFS and OS by the inhibition of RAS were 0.71 (P = 0.021) and 0.68 (P = 0.014) in never smokers and 0.70 (P = 0.027) and 0.77 (P = 0.124) in patients receiving gemcitabine monotherapy. CONCLUSION: The inhibition of RAS in advanced pancreatic cancer might improve clinical outcomes in cases without a history of smoking or in cases receiving gemcitabine monotherapy.
Authors: Randall E Brand; Julia B Greer; Eugene Zolotarevsky; Rhonda Brand; Hongyan Du; Diane Simeone; Anna Zisman; Addi Gorchow; Shih-Yuan Connie Lee; Hemant K Roy; Michelle A Anderson Journal: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol Date: 2009-06-26 Impact factor: 11.382
Authors: Erwin J M van Geenen; Mark M Smits; Tim C M A Schreuder; Donald L van der Peet; Elisabeth Bloemena; Chris J J Mulder Journal: Am J Gastroenterol Date: 2011-05-17 Impact factor: 10.864
Authors: C Bosetti; E Lucenteforte; D T Silverman; G Petersen; P M Bracci; B T Ji; E Negri; D Li; H A Risch; S H Olson; S Gallinger; A B Miller; H B Bueno-de-Mesquita; R Talamini; J Polesel; P Ghadirian; P A Baghurst; W Zatonski; E Fontham; W R Bamlet; E A Holly; P Bertuccio; Y T Gao; M Hassan; H Yu; R C Kurtz; M Cotterchio; J Su; P Maisonneuve; E J Duell; P Boffetta; C La Vecchia Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2011-11-21 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Y Nakai; H Isayama; H Ijichi; T Sasaki; N Sasahira; K Hirano; H Kogure; K Kawakubo; H Yagioka; Y Yashima; S Mizuno; K Yamamoto; T Arizumi; O Togawa; S Matsubara; T Tsujino; K Tateishi; M Tada; M Omata; K Koike Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2010-10-26 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: M Kanai; S Morita; S Matsumoto; T Nishimura; E Hatano; S Yazumi; T Sasaki; H Yasuda; T Kitano; A Misawa; H Ishiguro; K Yanagihara; I Ikai; R Doi; M Fukushima Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2009-05-20 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Daniel Keizman; Maya Gottfried; Maya Ish-Shalom; Natalie Maimon; Avivit Peer; Avivit Neumann; Hans Hammers; Mario A Eisenberger; Victoria Sinibaldi; Roberto Pili; Henry Hayat; Svetlana Kovel; Avishay Sella; Ben Boursi; Rony Weitzen; Wilmosh Mermershtain; Keren Rouvinov; Raanan Berger; Michael A Carducci Journal: Oncologist Date: 2013-12-05
Authors: John D Martin; Dai Fukumura; Dan G Duda; Yves Boucher; Rakesh K Jain Journal: Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 6.915
Authors: Scott W Keith; Vittorio Maio; Hwyda A Arafat; Matthew Alcusky; Thomas Karagiannis; Carol Rabinowitz; Harish Lavu; Daniel Z Louis Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-02-07 Impact factor: 4.430