Louis de Mestier1, Thomas Walter2, Camille Evrard3, Paul de Boissieu4, Olivia Hentic5, Jérôme Cros6, David Tougeron7, Catherine Lombard-Bohas2, Vinciane Rebours5, Pascal Hammel8, Philippe Ruszniewski5. 1. Department of Pancreatology and Gastroenterology, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, and Paris University, Clichy, France, louis.demestier@aphp.fr. 2. Department of Digestive Oncology, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Edouard Herriot Hospital, Lyon, France. 3. Department of Medical Oncology, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France. 4. Department of Epidemiology and Public Health, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre Hospital, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, and Paris-Sud University, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. 5. Department of Pancreatology and Gastroenterology, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, and Paris University, Clichy, France. 6. Department of Pathology, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, and Paris University, Clichy, France. 7. Department of Gastroenterology, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France. 8. Department of Digestive Oncology, ENETS Centre of Excellence, Beaujon Hospital, and Paris University, Clichy, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The combination of capecitabine (CAP) with temozolomide (TEM) chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) relies on limited evidence. We compared TEM-CAP to TEM alone in patients with advanced PanNET. METHODS: Consecutive patients with advanced PanNET treated with TEM or TEM-CAP between 2004 and 2017 in three expert centers were included. Progression-free survival (PFS), tolerance, tumor response, and overall survival were compared between the two groups. Propensity-based analyses were performed to reduce confounding bias due to the nonrandomized setting. RESULTS: TEM and TEM-CAP were administered to 38 patients and 100 patients, respectively, with a median age of 58 years. The patients in the TEM group more often had hormonal syndromes (p = 0.03), a longer median delay to diagnosis (p = 0.001), and a higher number of pretreatment lines (p < 0.001). The performance status was 0 in 58% versus 65% of the patients, and tumor's median Ki-67 index was 8% versus 11%, respectively. Tolerance was similar, except that there were more cases of asthenia in the TEM group (p = 0.017) and more cases of hand-foot syndrome in the TEM-CAP group (p = 0.025). The objective response rate was 34% versus 51% (p = 0.088). The raw median PFS was similar with TEM and with TEM-CAP (21.4 vs. 19.8 months, p = 0.84). Although CAP tended to decrease the risk of progression in Cox multivariate analysis (HR 0.65, p = 0.12), it had no effect after adjustment for the propensity score (HR 1.06, p = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS: TEM-CAP might not prolong PFS but might achieve a higher response rate than TEM alone. Hence, TEM-CAP might be preferred when tumor shrinkage is the main therapeutic objective. Otherwise, TEM might be adequate for patients with an impaired performance status or in case of extrahepatic metastases.
BACKGROUND: The combination of capecitabine (CAP) with temozolomide (TEM) chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (PanNET) relies on limited evidence. We compared TEM-CAP to TEM alone in patients with advanced PanNET. METHODS: Consecutive patients with advanced PanNET treated with TEM or TEM-CAP between 2004 and 2017 in three expert centers were included. Progression-free survival (PFS), tolerance, tumor response, and overall survival were compared between the two groups. Propensity-based analyses were performed to reduce confounding bias due to the nonrandomized setting. RESULTS:TEM and TEM-CAP were administered to 38 patients and 100 patients, respectively, with a median age of 58 years. The patients in the TEM group more often had hormonal syndromes (p = 0.03), a longer median delay to diagnosis (p = 0.001), and a higher number of pretreatment lines (p < 0.001). The performance status was 0 in 58% versus 65% of the patients, and tumor's median Ki-67 index was 8% versus 11%, respectively. Tolerance was similar, except that there were more cases of asthenia in the TEM group (p = 0.017) and more cases of hand-foot syndrome in the TEM-CAP group (p = 0.025). The objective response rate was 34% versus 51% (p = 0.088). The raw median PFS was similar with TEM and with TEM-CAP (21.4 vs. 19.8 months, p = 0.84). Although CAP tended to decrease the risk of progression in Cox multivariate analysis (HR 0.65, p = 0.12), it had no effect after adjustment for the propensity score (HR 1.06, p = 0.80). CONCLUSIONS:TEM-CAP might not prolong PFS but might achieve a higher response rate than TEM alone. Hence, TEM-CAP might be preferred when tumor shrinkage is the main therapeutic objective. Otherwise, TEM might be adequate for patients with an impaired performance status or in case of extrahepatic metastases.
Authors: M Pavel; D O'Toole; F Costa; J Capdevila; D Gross; R Kianmanesh; E Krenning; U Knigge; R Salazar; U-F Pape; K Öberg Journal: Neuroendocrinology Date: 2016-01-05 Impact factor: 4.914
Authors: Jonathan R Strosberg; Robert L Fine; Junsung Choi; Aejaz Nasir; Domenico Coppola; Dung-Tsa Chen; James Helm; Larry Kvols Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-09-07 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Arvind Dasari; Chan Shen; Daniel Halperin; Bo Zhao; Shouhao Zhou; Ying Xu; Tina Shih; James C Yao Journal: JAMA Oncol Date: 2017-10-01 Impact factor: 31.777
Authors: T Walter; B van Brakel; C Vercherat; V Hervieu; J Forestier; J-A Chayvialle; Y Molin; C Lombard-Bohas; M-O Joly; J-Y Scoazec Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Javier Pozas; María San Román; Teresa Alonso-Gordoa; Miguel Pozas; Laura Caracuel; Alfredo Carrato; Javier Molina-Cerrillo Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2019-10-08 Impact factor: 5.923
Authors: Rosa Della Monica; Mariella Cuomo; Roberta Visconti; Annabella di Mauro; Michela Buonaiuto; Davide Costabile; Giulia De Riso; Teodolinda Di Risi; Elia Guadagno; Roberto Tafuto; Sabrina Lamia; Alessandro Ottaiano; Paolo Cappabianca; Maria Laura Del Basso de Caro; Fabiana Tatangelo; Juergen Hench; Stephan Frank; Salvatore Tafuto; Lorenzo Chiariotti Journal: Oncol Res Date: 2021-05-20 Impact factor: 5.574