L Bergmann1, L Maute2, G Heil3, J Rüssel4, E Weidmann5, D Köberle6, S Fuxius7, K Weigang-Köhler8, W E Aulitzky9, B Wörmann10, G Hartung11, B Moritz12, L Edler13, I Burkholder14, M E Scheulen15, H Richly15. 1. Medical Clinic II, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Germany. Electronic address: l.bergmann@em.uni-frankfurt.de. 2. Medical Clinic II, University Hospital Frankfurt, Frankfurt/Main, Germany. 3. Klinik für Hämatologie und Onkologie, Märkische Kliniken Lüdenscheid, Lüdenscheid, Germany. 4. Department of Oncology and Hematology, Martin-Luther-University Halle-Wittenberg, Halle, Germany. 5. Krankenhaus Nordwest, UCT-University Cancer Center, Frankfurt/Main, Germany. 6. Department of Medical Oncology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland. 7. Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis, Heidelberg, Germany. 8. Medizinische Klinik, Klinikum Nürnberg Nord, Nürnberg, Germany. 9. Hämatologie, Onkologie, Klinische Immunologie, Robert-Bosch-Krankenhaus, Stuttgart, Germany. 10. Medizinisches Versorgungszentrum Onkologie, Charité - Campus Virchow-Klinikum, Berlin, Germany. 11. Onkologische Schwerpunktpraxis, Groß-Gerau, Germany. 12. CESAR Central European Society for Anticancer Drug Research-EWIV, Vienna, Austria. 13. Division of Biostatistics, German Cancer Research Center, Heidelberg, Germany. 14. Department of Nursing and Health, University of Applied Sciences of the Saarland, Saarbruecken, Germany. 15. Department of Medical Oncology, West German Cancer Center, University Hospital Essen, University Duisburg-Essen, Essen, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most common malignant tumours and is still associated with a poor prognosis in advanced disease. To improve the standard therapy with gemcitabine, we initiated a prospective randomised phase-II trial with gemcitabine (GEM) versus gemcitabine plus sunitinib (SUNGEM) based on data of in vitro trials and phase-I data for the combination treatment. The rational of adding sunitinib was its putative antiangiogenic mechanism of action. METHODS: A total of 106 eligible patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic PDAC without previous system therapy were randomised to receive GEM at a dosage of 1.000mg/m(2) d1, 8, 15 q28 versus a combination of SUNGEM at a dosage of GEM 1.000mg/m(2) d1+8 and sunitinib 50mg p.o. d1-14, q21d. The primary end-point was progression free survival (PFS), secondary end-points were overall survival (OS), toxicity and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: The confirmatory analysis of PFS was based on the intend-to-treat (ITT) population (N=106). The median PFS was 13.3 weeks (95% confidence interval (95%-CI): 10.4-18.1 weeks) for GEM and 11.6 weeks for SUNGEM (95%-CI: 7.0-18.0 weeks; p=0.78 one-sided log-rank). The ORR was 6.1% (95%-CI: 0.7-20.2%) for GEM and for 7.1% (95%-CI: 0.9-23.5%) for SUNGEM (p=0.87). The median time to progression (TTP) was 14.0 weeks (95%-CI: 12.4-22.3 weeks) for GEM and 18.0 weeks (95%-CI: 11.3-19.3 weeks) for SUNGEM (p=0.60; two-sided log-rank). The median OS was 36.7 weeks (95%-CI: 20.6-49.0 weeks) for the GEM arm and 30.4 weeks (95%-CI: 18.1-37.6 weeks) for the SUNGEM (p=0.78, one-sided log-rank). In regard to toxicities, suspected SAEs were reported in 53.7% in the GEM arm and 71.2% in the SUNGEM arm. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was statistically significantly higher in the SUNGEM arm with 48.1% versus 27.8% in the GEM arm (p=0.045, two sided log-rank). CONCLUSIONS: The combination SUNGEM was not sufficient superior in locally advanced or metastatic PDAC compared to GEM alone in regard to efficacy but was associated with more toxicity.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND:Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most common malignant tumours and is still associated with a poor prognosis in advanced disease. To improve the standard therapy with gemcitabine, we initiated a prospective randomised phase-II trial with gemcitabine (GEM) versus gemcitabine plus sunitinib (SUNGEM) based on data of in vitro trials and phase-I data for the combination treatment. The rational of adding sunitinib was its putative antiangiogenic mechanism of action. METHODS: A total of 106 eligible patients with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic PDAC without previous system therapy were randomised to receive GEM at a dosage of 1.000mg/m(2) d1, 8, 15 q28 versus a combination of SUNGEM at a dosage of GEM 1.000mg/m(2) d1+8 and sunitinib 50mg p.o. d1-14, q21d. The primary end-point was progression free survival (PFS), secondary end-points were overall survival (OS), toxicity and overall response rate (ORR). RESULTS: The confirmatory analysis of PFS was based on the intend-to-treat (ITT) population (N=106). The median PFS was 13.3 weeks (95% confidence interval (95%-CI): 10.4-18.1 weeks) for GEM and 11.6 weeks for SUNGEM (95%-CI: 7.0-18.0 weeks; p=0.78 one-sided log-rank). The ORR was 6.1% (95%-CI: 0.7-20.2%) for GEM and for 7.1% (95%-CI: 0.9-23.5%) for SUNGEM (p=0.87). The median time to progression (TTP) was 14.0 weeks (95%-CI: 12.4-22.3 weeks) for GEM and 18.0 weeks (95%-CI: 11.3-19.3 weeks) for SUNGEM (p=0.60; two-sided log-rank). The median OS was 36.7 weeks (95%-CI: 20.6-49.0 weeks) for the GEM arm and 30.4 weeks (95%-CI: 18.1-37.6 weeks) for the SUNGEM (p=0.78, one-sided log-rank). In regard to toxicities, suspected SAEs were reported in 53.7% in the GEM arm and 71.2% in the SUNGEM arm. Grade 3 and 4 neutropenia was statistically significantly higher in the SUNGEM arm with 48.1% versus 27.8% in the GEM arm (p=0.045, two sided log-rank). CONCLUSIONS: The combination SUNGEM was not sufficient superior in locally advanced or metastatic PDAC compared to GEM alone in regard to efficacy but was associated with more toxicity.
Authors: Christopher Gromisch; Motaz Qadan; Mariana Albuquerque Machado; Kebin Liu; Yolonda Colson; Mark W Grinstaff Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 12.701