| Literature DB >> 33178608 |
Bolun Jiang1, Li Zhou1, Jun Lu1, Yizhi Wang1, Chengxi Liu1, Lei You1, Junchao Guo1.
Abstract
Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a malignancy with one of the worst prognoses worldwide and has an overall 5-year survival rate of only 9%. Although chemotherapy is the recommended treatment for patients with advanced PDAC, its efficacy is not satisfactory. The dense dysplastic stroma of PDAC is a major obstacle to the delivery of chemotherapy drugs and plays an important role in the progression of PDAC. Therefore, stroma-targeting therapy is considered a potential treatment strategy to improve the efficacy of chemotherapy and patient survival. While several preclinical studies have shown encouraging results, the anti-tumor potential of the PDAC stroma has also been revealed, and the extreme depletion might promote tumor progression and undermine patient survival. Therefore, achieving a balance between stromal abundance and depletion might be the further of stroma-targeting therapy. This review summarized the current progress of stroma-targeting therapy in PDAC and discussed the double-edged sword of its therapeutic effects.Entities:
Keywords: chemotherapy; nanotherapy; pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; stroma; tumor microenvironment
Year: 2020 PMID: 33178608 PMCID: PMC7593693 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2020.576399
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Oncol ISSN: 2234-943X Impact factor: 6.244
Clinical trials assessing stroma-targeting therapy in PDAC.
| Target | Agents | Patient population | Trial phase | mPFS (months) | mOS (months) | Status | NIH number |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| HA | PEGPH20 + GEM + nab-paclitaxel vs GEM + nab-paclitaxel | Metastatic PDAC | Phase II | 6.0 vs 5.3 | 9.6 vs 9.2 | Completed | NCT01839487 |
| PEGPH20 + GEM + nab-paclitaxel vs GEM + nab-paclitaxel | Metastatic PDAC (HA-High) | Phase II | 9.2 vs 5.2 | 11.5 vs 8.5 | Completed | NCT01839487 | |
| PEGPH20 + GEM + nab-paclitaxel vs GEM + nab-paclitaxel | Metastatic PDAC (HA-High) | Phase III | 7.1 vs 7.1 | 11.2 vs 11.5 | Terminated | NCT02715804 | |
| PEGPH20 + FOLFIRINOX vs FOLFIRINOX | Metastatic PDAC | Phase Ib/II | 4.3 vs 6.2 | 7.7 vs 14.4 | Terminated | NCT01959139 | |
| Hedgehog | IPI-926 | Solid tumors | Phase I | – | – | Completed | NCT00761696 |
| IPI-926 + GEM vs GEM | Metastatic PC | Phase Ib/II | The former < the latter | The former < the latter | Completed | NCT01130142 | |
| IPI-926+ FOLFIRINOX | Locally advanced or metastatic PDAC | Phase Ib | 8.4 | – | Completed | NCT01383538 | |
| Vismodegib + GEM vs GEM | Metastatic PC | Phase Ib/II | 4.0 vs 2.5 | 6.9 vs 6.1 | Completed | NCT01064622 | |
| Vismodegib +GEM | Metastatic PC | Phase II | 2.8 | 5.3 | Completed | NCT01195415 | |
| Vismodegib +GEM + nab-paclitaxel | Metastatic PDAC | Phase II | 5.42 | 9.79 | Completed | NCT01088815 | |
| Sonidegib + GEM | Locally advanced or metastatic PDAC | Phase Ib | 4.9 | – | Completed | NCT01487785 | |
| CTGF | Pamrevlumab + GEM + nab-paclitaxel vs GEM + nab-paclitaxel | Locally advanced PDAC | Phase I/II | – | – | Completed | NCT02210559 |
| Pamrevlumab + GEM + nab-paclitaxel vs GEM + nab-paclitaxel | Locally advanced PDAC | Phase III | – | – | Recruiting | NCT03941093 | |
| Pamrevlumab + GEM + erlotinib | Locally advanced or metastatic PDAC | Phase I | 4.3 | 9.4 | Completed | NCT01181245 | |
| R-A system | Losartan + FOLFIRINOX + chemoradiotherapy | Locally advanced PDAC | Phase II | 17.5 | 31.4 | Completed | NCT01821729 |
| Losartan + nivolumab + FOLFIRINOX + SBRT | Localized PDAC (Borderline/potentially resectable or locally advanced) | Phase II | – | – | Recruiting | NCT03563248 | |
| – | UM + GEM | Locally advanced or metastatic PDAC | Phase I | – | 17.6 vs 8.9 | Completed | NCT01674556 |
CTGF, connective tissue growth factor; DDR1, discoidin domain receptor 1; FOLFIRINOX, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan; GEM, gemcitabine; HA, hyaluronic acid; NIH, National Institutes of Health; mOS, median overall survival; PC, pancreatic cancer; PDAC, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma; mPFS, median progression-free survival; R-A system, renin-angiotensin system; SBRT, stereotactic body radiation therapy; UM, ultrasound microbubbles.
Figure 1Schematic of the extracellular matrix network and stroma-targeting strategies in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The dense desmoplasia stroma of PDAC consists of several cellular, acellular and biophysical components, which interact mutually to promote the growth and metastasis of PDAC. Inactivating pancreatic stellate cells (PSCs) or a certain population of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) by Hedgehog inhibitors and halofuginone or altering the products these CAFs produce, such as hyaluronic acid (HA) and collagen, by PEGPH20 or discoidin domain receptor (DDR) inhibitor might be potential strategies to reverse the dense dysplastic stroma of PDAC. In addition, remodeling the tumor vasculature by transforming growth factor-β (TGF-β) inhibitors or angiotensin system inhibitors (ASIs) decreases the interstitial fluid pressure (IFP), reverses acidosis, and the hypoxic environment, and enhances the efficacy of drug delivery. Furthermore, nano-drug delivery systems have been designed to respond to environmental or external stimuli which triggers drug release. T-mark represents inhibition; arrow, activation. ECM, extracellular matrix; MMPs, matrix metalloproteinase; CTGF, connective tissue growth factor.