Nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine plus camrelizumab and radiotherapy versus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine alone for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a prospective cohort study
Treatment options specifically for patients with locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LAPC) are scare and chemotherapy alone delivers limited efficacy. Immunotherapy and radiotherapy are potential effective treatments for LAPC, and both of them may synergize with chemotherapy. Therefore, in this prospective cohort study, we compared the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine combined with anti-programmed cell death (PD-1) immunotherapy and radiotherapy (hereafter, combination treatment) versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (chemotherapy alone) in the treatment of LAPC. In the combination group, participants received conventional fractionated radiotherapy with doses ranging from 54 to 63 Gy in 28 fractions, intravenous camrelizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks, and intravenous nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine on day 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for eight cycles until disease progression, death or unacceptable toxicity. In the chemotherapy group, participants received intravenous nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine on day 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for eight cycles. From April, 2020 to December, 2021, 96 participants with LAPC were prospectively enrolled with 32 received combination treatment and 64 received chemotherapy alone at a single center. The combination treatment yielded significantly longer median overall-survival (22.3 months vs. 18.6 months, P = 0.031) and progression-free survival (12.0 months vs. 10.5 months, P = 0.043) than chemotherapy alone did. And the incidence of severe adverse events was not significantly different between the combination group and chemotherapy group (P = 0.856). In conclusion, nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine combined with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy and radiotherapy was effective and safe for LAPC patients, and it warrants further investigation in larger randomized trials.
Shuling Chen, Jiaxin Li, Aoran Dong and Zelong Liu contributed equally to this work.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Abkürzungen
LAPC
Locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma
IO
Immunotherapy
PD-1
Programmed cell death-1
OS
Overall survival
AE
Adverse event
ORR
Objective response rate
RECIST
Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors
DCR
Disease control rate
PFS
Progression-free survival
HR
Hazard ratio
CI
Confidence interval
To the editor,
Locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LAPC) accounts for a sizeable proportion of pancreatic cancer, which is one of the most lethal cancers globally among all cancers [1]. However, the optimal management of LAPC remains an open question, due to the dismal therapeutic efficacy and scarce of prospective treatment data specifically in LAPC.
Anzeige
Chemotherapy alone (i.e., gemcitabine plus albumin-bound paclitaxel) delivers limited efficacy for LAPC [2‐4]. For LAPC in which microscopic metastatic disease was present, novel therapies that can enhance local control while having systematic efficacy to control microscopic metastatic lesions may have the greatest potential for LAPC [5]. Chemoradiation could deliver a systematic benefit during local tumor control to reduce the opportunity of occult progression of pancreatic cancer [6, 7]. On the other hand, anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) immunotherapy can synergize with chemotherapy to reduce tumor burden by alleviating chemotherapy resistance and modifying microenvironment [8]. Besides, it was also reported to synergize with radiotherapy by promoting T-cell priming with immunogenic cell death and reversing immunosuppressive microenvironment [9‐12]. Thus, there is a rationale to combine these three treatments to promote both of the local and systematic tumor control. However, there is a lack of clinical data in this aspect.
Therefore, we performed this prospective cohort study to compare the efficacy and safety of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine combined with anti- PD-1 immunotherapy and radiotherapy (combination treatment) versus nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (chemotherapy alone) for LAPC patients. We enrolled treatment-naïve, histologically or cytologically confirmed LAPC patients who received one of these two treatments according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria (Additional file 1: Methods). In the combination group, participants received conventional fractionated radiotherapy with doses ranging from 54 to 63 Gy in 28 fractions, intravenous camrelizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks, and intravenous nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine on day 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for eight cycles until disease progression, death or unacceptable toxicity (Fig. 1a). In the chemotherapy group, participants received intravenous nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine on day 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle for eight cycles (Fig. 1a). All patients were informed of the advantages and disadvantages of the two treatment options, including potential treatment outcomes, treatment-related morbidities and costs, and the final treatment decision was generally made by the patients. Other detailed methods are described in Additional file 1: Methods. From April, 2020 and December, 2021, 96 participants were finally enrolled with 32 received combination treatment and 64 received chemotherapy alone (Additional file 2: Fig. S1). There was no significant difference in any baseline characteristics between these two groups (all P > 0.05, Additional file 3: Table S1).
Fig. 1
A schematic diagram of two treatment modalities and survival analyses of the patients with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma who underwent the combination treatment or chemotherapy alone. a A schematic diagram of the combination treatment and chemotherapy; b Kaplan–Meier curves of overall survival for participants with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma who underwent the combination treatment or chemotherapy alone; c Kaplan–Meier curves of progression-free survival for participants with locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma who underwent the combination treatment or chemotherapy alone
×
The objective response rate (ORR) based on the RECIST1.1 criteria was 28.1% in the combination group and 21.9% in the chemotherapy group (P = 0.163); while the disease control rate (DCR) based on the RECIST1.1 criteria was 90.6% in the combination group and 78.1% in the chemotherapy group (P = 0.163) (Table 1). The median follow-up time was 16.6 (range 12.1–27.5) months in the combination group and 17.9 (range 15.2–26.7) months in the chemotherapy group. The median overall survival (OS) was 22.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 16.6, 28.0) in the combination group and 18.6 months (95% CI 13.3, 23.9) in the chemotherapy group (P = 0.031) (Table 1; Fig. 1b). The median PFS was 12.0 months (95% CI 5.8, 18.1) in the combination group and 10.5 months (95% CI 6.3, 14.7) in the chemotherapy group (P = 0.043) (Table 1; Fig. 1c). Univariable and multivariable analyses showed that only the treatment allocation was the independent prognostic factors of OS (HR = 0.486; 95% CI 0.248–0.952; P = 0.035) and PFS (HR = 0.577; 95% CI 0.336–0.992; P = 0.047) (Additional file 3: Table S2). During the follow-up, there was no significant difference in the pattern of treatment failure and post-protocol intervention between two groups (all P > 0.05) (Additional file 3: Table S3). The results of subgroup survival analyses are shown in Additional file 1: Results and Additional file 2: Fig. S2.
Table 1
Summary of tumor response and survival outcomes according to RECIST 1.1 criteria
Outcomes
Combination group (n = 32), n (%)
Chemotherapy group (n = 64), n (%)
P value
Best tumor response
Complete response
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
Partial response
9 (28.1)
14 (21.9)
0.499
Stable disease
20 (62.5)
36 (56.3)
0.558
Progressive disease
3 (9.4)
14 (21.9)
0.163
Objective response rate
9 (28.1)
14 (21.9)
0.499
Disease control rate
29 (90.6)
50 (78.1)
0.163
Median OS (mo)*
22.3 ± 2.9 (16.6–28.0)
18.6 ± 2.7 (13.3–23.9)
0.031
Median PFS (mo)*
12.0 ± 3.1 (5.8–18.1)
10.5 ± 2.2 (6.3–14.7)
0.043
RECIST Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, OS overall survival, PFS progression-free survival
*Data in parentheses are the 95% confidence interval
Additional file 3: Table S4 shows grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs). No unexpected toxicity was observed, and no treatment-related death occurred. The incidence of severe AEs was not significantly different between two groups (81.3% vs. 79.7%; P = 0.856). In the combination group, the most frequent (≥ 10% incidence) AEs that were ≥ grade 3 were leukopenia (12 [37.5%]), fatigue (4 [12.5%]), and anemia (4 [12.5%]) (while in the chemotherapy group were leukopenia (21 [32.8%]) and fatigue (7 [10.9%]). Other results regarding treatment interruption, reduction or delay are reported in Additional file 1: Results.
Anzeige
In summary, for the first time, we showed that nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine combined with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy and radiotherapy was effective and safe for LAPC patients, and it warrants further investigation in larger randomized trials.
Acknowledgements
None.
Declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate
This study was approved by the Institution’s Ethics Committee (approval number: [2020]247), and all the participants provided written informed consent before enrollment.
Consent for publication
All the authors agree for the publication of this study.
Competing interests
All the authors declared no conflict of interests.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Mit e.Med Innere Medizin erhalten Sie Zugang zu CME-Fortbildungen des Fachgebietes Innere Medizin, den Premium-Inhalten der internistischen Fachzeitschriften, inklusive einer gedruckten internistischen Zeitschrift Ihrer Wahl.
Nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine plus camrelizumab and radiotherapy versus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine alone for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a prospective cohort study
verfasst von
Shuling Chen Jiaxin Li Aoran Dong Zelong Liu Meiyan Zhu Meng Jin Guangyan Wei Shuang Wu Yan Wang Yong Chen Zhenwei Peng
Unter Frauen, die ein Levonorgestrel-freisetzendes intrauterines System (IUS) verwenden, ist die Brustkrebsrate um 13% erhöht. Dafür kommt es deutlich seltener zu Endometrium-, Zervix- und Ovarialkarzinomen.
Wie stark Menschen mit fortgeschrittenem NSCLC von einer Therapie mit Immun-Checkpoint-Hemmern profitieren, hängt offenbar auch davon ab, wie sehr die Diagnose ihre psychische Verfassung erschüttert
Ein bispezifischer Antikörper formiert gezielt eine Armee neutrophiler Granulozyten gegen Krebszellen. An den Antikörper gekoppeltes TNF-alpha soll die Zellen zudem tief in solide Tumoren hineinführen.
Fast ein Viertel der Personen mit mäßig dysplastischen Stimmlippenläsionen entwickelt einen Kehlkopftumor. Solche Personen benötigen daher eine besonders enge ärztliche Überwachung.
Update Onkologie
Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletterund bleiben Sie gut informiert.
