Renato Lenzi

Preoperative Gemcitabine-Based Chemoradiation for Patients With Resectable Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreatic Head

PURPOSE We conducted a phase II trial to assess the outcomes of patients who received preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation and pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for stage I/II pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Eligible patients with pancreatic head/uncinate process adenocarcinoma and radiographically defined potentially resectable disease received chemoradiation with 7 weekly intravenous (IV) infusions of gemcitabine (400 mg/m(2) IV over 30 minutes) plus radiation therapy (30 Gy in 10 fractions over 2 weeks). Patients underwent restaging 4 to 6 weeks after completion of chemoradiation and, in the absence of disease progression, were taken to surgery. RESULTS The study enrolled 86 patients. At the time of restaging, disease progression or a decline in performance status precluded 13 patients from surgery. Seventy-three (85%) of 86 patients were taken to surgery, extrapancreatic disease was found in nine, and 64 (74%) of 86 underwent a successful PD. Median overall survival (86 patients) was 22.7 months with a 27% 5-year survival. Median survival was 34 months for the 64 patients who underwent PD and 7 months for the 22 unresected patients (P < .001). The 5-year survival for those who did and did not undergo PD was 36% and 0%, respectively. CONCLUSION Preoperative gemcitabine-based chemoradiation followed by restaging and evaluation for surgery separated the study population into two different subsets: patients likely to benefit from PD (n = 64) and those in whom surgery would be unlikely to provide clinical benefit (n = 22). Furthermore, the encouraging overall survival observed in this large trial supports the continued investigation of gemcitabine-based preoperative therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer.

Randomized Phase II Comparison of Dose-Intense Gemcitabine: Thirty-Minute Infusion and Fixed Dose Rate Infusion in Patients With Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE To conduct a randomized phase II trial of dose-intense gemcitabine using a standard 30-minute infusion or the fixed dose rate (FDR) infusion (10 mg/m2/min) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS In this prospective trial, patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated with 2,200 mg/m2 gemcitabine over 30 minutes (standard arm) or 1,500 mg/m2 gemcitabine over 150 minutes (FDR arm) on days 1, 8, and 15 of every 4-week cycle. The primary end point of this trial was time to treatment failure. Secondary end points included time to progression, median survival, safety, and pharmacokinetic studies of gemcitabine. RESULTS Ninety-two patients were enrolled onto this study; 91% of the patients had metastatic disease. Time to treatment failure was comparable in both treatment groups; however, the median survival for all patients was 5.0 months in the standard arm and 8.0 months in the FDR arm (P =.013). For patients with metastases, the median survival was 4.9 months in the standard arm and 7.3 months in FDR arm (P =.094). The 1- and 2-year survival rates for all patients were 9% (standard arm) versus 28.8% (FDR; P =.014) and 2.2% (standard arm) versus 18.3% (FDR; P =.007), respectively. Patients in the FDR infusion arm experienced consistently more hematologic toxicity. Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated a two-fold increase in intracellular gemcitabine triphosphate concentration in the FDR arm (P =.046). CONCLUSION Pharmacokinetic and clinical data in this trial supports the continued evaluation of the FDR infusion strategy with gemcitabine.

Metastatic patterns in adenocarcinoma

Unique metastatic patterns cited in the literature often arise from anecdotal clinical observations and autopsy reports. The authors analyzed clinical data from a large number of patients with histologically confirmed, distant‐stage adenocarcinoma to evaluate metastatic patterns.

Unknown primary carcinoma: natural history and prognostic factors in 657 consecutive patients.

PURPOSE To evaluate the natural history, validate previous observations, and identify prognostic factors in patients with unknown primary carcinoma (UPC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Nine hundred twenty-seven consecutive patients referred to the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center with a preliminary diagnosis of UPC were prospectively identified. A standardized evaluation narrowed the study population to 657 patients with UPC. All data were recorded and computerized for storage, retrieval, and analysis. The primary end point for the study was survival, which was calculated from the first day of patient registration. Survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared using the Cox-Mantel log-rank test. To identify important prognostic factors, univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted. RESULTS The demographics of the UPC patient population mirrored those of the general population of patients referred to our cancer center except for an excess of men among the UPC patients. Most patients had histologic or cytologic evidence of adenocarcinoma and had more than one organ site metastatically involved. Univariate and multivariate analyses identified numerous important prognostic factors with a significant influence on survival, including sex, number of organ sites involved, specific organ sites involved, and pathologic subtypes. CONCLUSION This study validated previously identified important prognostic factors for survival in UPC. Additional variables that had an impact on survival were identified and the complex interaction of the factors was explored. As patient numbers increase, this database will be able to provide further analyses of patient subsets and potentially relate specific clinical features to the evolving molecular and biochemical understanding of these malignancies.

Oncologists’ Attitudes Toward and Practices in Giving Bad News: An Exploratory Study

PURPOSE To examine the attitudes and practices of oncologists in disclosure of unfavorable medical information to cancer patients. METHODS A questionnaire was administered to a group of physicians who attended the 1999 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. The questionnaire assessed demographic and practice-related information and the frequency of patient encounters in which unfavorable cancer-related information was disclosed. Participants were also asked about difficulties they had when approaching stressful discussions and communication strategies used in giving unfavorable information. RESULTS The questionnaire was completed by 167 oncologists. Sixty-four percent were medical oncologists. Thirty-eight percent practiced in North America, 26% practiced in Europe, 13% practiced in South America, and 13% practiced in Asia. Participants gave bad news to patients an average of 35 times per month. Discussing no further curative treatment and hospice was reported as most difficult. In disclosing the cancer diagnosis and prognosis, physicians from Western countries were less likely to withhold unfavorable information from the patient at the familys request, avoid the discussion entirely, use euphemisms, and give treatments known not to be effective so as not to destroy hope than physicians from other countries. There was significant variability in opinions regarding the best time to discuss resuscitation, with 18% of respondents believing that it should be done close to the end of life. CONCLUSION There was significant variability in how physicians approach information disclosure to cancer patients. Factors such as geographical region and cultural and family variables may be important influences in this process.

Improved overall survival among responders to preoperative chemoradiation for locally advanced rectal cancer

The aim of this study was to determine if the response to preoperative radiation and chemotherapy with continuous infusion 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) was predictive for survival among patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Preoperative chemoradiation (CTX/XRT) that delivered 45 Gy in 25 fractions over 5 weeks with continuous infusion 5-FU (300 mg/m2/day) was given to 117 patients. The pretreatment stage distribution, as determined by endorectal ultrasound (u), included uT2N0 in 2%, uT3N0 in 47%, uT3N1 in 49%, and uT4N0 in 2% of cases; endorectal ultrasound was not performed in 13% of cases (15 patients). Approximately 6 weeks after completion of CTX/XRT, surgery was performed. Adjuvant chemotherapy, consisting of 400 to 425 mg/m2 of 5-FU plus 20 mg/m2 leucovorin for 5 days, was administered every 28 days for 4 to 6 cycles after surgical resection. Among the 74 patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, the preoperative stage of disease was 31 with T3N0 and 43 T3N1. Median follow-up was 46 months (range 2 to 89 months). The pathologic tumor stages were Tis-2N0 in 26%, T2N1 in 5%, T3N0 in 21%, T3N1 in 15%, T4N0 in 5%, and T4N1 in 1%; a complete response (CR) to preoperative CTX/XRT was pathologically confirmed in 32 (27%) of patients. Tumor down-staging occurred in 72 (62%) cases. A sphincter-saving procedure (SP) was possible in 59% of patients. The median DFS and overall survival rates for responders were 46 months and 47 months, respectively; for non-responders these outcome measures were 38 months and 41 months, respectively. Log-rank analysis showed that the distant metastatic-free survival rates improved with any response to CTX/XRT (p < 0.00001), CR to CTX/XRT (p < 0.009) and SP (p < 0.012). Likewise, these parameters also significantly influenced DFS rates (CTX/XRT p < 0.00001; CR p < 0.006; and SP p < 0.008). Control of pelvic disease was influenced by clinical size (p < 0.002) and SP (p < 0.016) on univariate analysis. On multivariate analysis only clinical size (p < 0.002) continued to be a significant factor for local control. Factors on multivariate analysis that resulted in significant improvements in cancer-specific survival included any response to preoperative CTX/XRT (p < 0.017) and administration of adjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.034). Any response to preoperative CTX/XRT improved distant metastatic-free and disease-free survival rates. Multivariate analysis confirmed that a response to preoperative CTX/XRT predicted for improvements in overall survival among patients with locally advanced rectal cancer. Patients who fail to respond to preoperative 5-FU based chemotherapy given concomitantly with radiation have higher rates of distant metastases with adjuvant 5-FU therapy.

Analysis of a diagnostic strategy for patients with suspected tumors of unknown origin.

PURPOSE Diagnostic strategies designed to identify the underlying primary malignancies in patients with unknown primary tumors (UPTs) have relied on retrospective analyses. We analyzed 879 consecutive patients referred with suspected UPTs to determine the yield and cost of a limited diagnostic evaluation, assess the contribution of specific studies to diagnosis, and analyze the survival patterns of patients in whom the primary tumor was diagnosed. PATIENTS AND METHODS Data from patients with a suspected UPT were entered into a computerized data base, and the patients underwent a predefined limited diagnostic evaluation. Primary malignancies were diagnosed by pathologic review alone or by pathologic criteria plus a physical or radiographic finding. Survival was measured from diagnosis, estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and compared using the Cox-Mantel log-rank test. RESULTS A primary tumor was found in 179 of 879 patients (20%). The survival duration of patients in whom the primary tumor was diagnosed was superior to that of patients in whom the primary tumor remained unknown. Specific patient subsets contributed most to the improved survival duration of the group in which the primary tumor was found, including lymphoma patients diagnosed solely by pathologic criteria and female patients with primary breast or ovarian cancer. The cost of diagnosis was mostly due to the extensive use of computed tomography. Except for ovarian cancer, computed tomography rarely identified treatable primary tumors. CONCLUSION The limited diagnostic evaluation used in this study identified patients with treatable malignancies and increased the survival duration of a population of suspected UPT patients. Primary malignancies with the best survival can be diagnosed through careful pathologic review and focused evaluations for breast and ovarian cancer in women.

Risk Factors for Pancreatic Cancer: Case-Control Study

OBJECTIVES:Although cigarette smoking is the most well-established environmental risk factor for pancreatic cancer, the interaction between smoking and other risk factors has not been assessed. We evaluated the independent effects of multiple risk factors for pancreatic cancer and determined whether the magnitude of cigarette smoking was modified by other risk factors in men and women.METHODS:We conducted a hospital-based case-control study involving 808 patients with pathologically diagnosed pancreatic cancer and 808 healthy frequency-matched controls. Information on risk factors was collected by personal interview, and unconditional logistic regression was used to determine adjusted odds ratios (AORs) by the maximum-likelihood method.RESULTS:Cigarette smoking, family history of pancreatic cancer, heavy alcohol consumption (>60 mL ethanol/day), diabetes mellitus, and history of pancreatitis were significant risk factors for pancreatic cancer. We found synergistic interactions between cigarette smoking and family history of pancreatic cancer (AOR 12.8, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.6–108.9) and diabetes mellitus (AOR 9.3, 95% CI 2.0–44.1) in women, according to an additive model. Approximately 23%, 9%, 3%, and 5% of pancreatic cancer cases in this study were related to cigarette smoking, diabetes mellitus, heavy alcohol consumption, and family history of pancreatic cancer, respectively.CONCLUSIONS:The significant synergy between these risk factors suggests a common pathway for carcinogenesis of the pancreas. Determining the underlying mechanisms for such synergies may lead to the development of pancreatic cancer prevention strategies for high-risk individuals.

Rapid-fractionation preoperative chemoradiation, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and intraoperative radiation therapy for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE To evaluate the toxicities, radiographic and pathologic responses, and event-free outcomes with combined modality treatment that involves preoperative rapid-fractionation chemoradiation, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and electron-beam intraoperative radiation therapy (EB-IORT) for patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with radiographically resectable localized adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head were entered onto a preoperative protocol that consisted of a 2-week course of fluorouracil (5-FU) 300 mg/m2 daily 5 days per week and concomitant rapid-fractionation radiation 30 Gy, 3 Gy daily 5 days per week. Radiographic restaging was performed 4 weeks after chemoradiation, and patients with localized disease underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with EB-IORT 10 to 15 Gy. RESULTS Thirty-five patients were entered onto the study and completed chemoradiation, 34 (97%) as outpatients. Three patients (9%) experienced grade 3 nausea and vomiting; no other grade 3 or 4 toxicities were observed. Of the 27 patients taken to surgery, 20 patients (74%) underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with EB-IORT. All patients had a less than grade III pathologic response to preoperative chemoradiation. At a median follow-up of 37 months, the 3-year survival rate in patients who underwent combined modality therapy was 23%. CONCLUSION Combined modality treatment with preoperative rapid-fractionation chemoradiation, pancreaticoduodenectomy, and EB-IORT is associated with minimal toxicity and excellent locoregional control. This represents one approach to maximize the proportion of patients who receive all components of combined modality therapy and avoids the toxicity of pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients found to have metastatic disease at the time of restaging.

Is the therapeutic index better with gemcitabine-based chemoradiation than with 5-fluorouracil-based chemoradiation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer?

PURPOSE To retrospectively compare the toxicity and efficacy of concurrent gemcitabine-based chemoradiation with that of concurrent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemoradiation in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Between September 1996 and May 2000, 114 patients with localized unresectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were treated with concurrent chemoradiation. Locally advanced unresectable disease was defined as low-density tumor in contact with the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) or celiac artery, or occlusion of the superior mesenteric-portal venous confluence. Fifty-three patients were selected to receive gemcitabine in 7 weekly cycles (250-500 mg/m(2)) with concurrent radiotherapy (median dose 30 Gy, range 30-33 Gy in 10-11 fractions). The remaining 61 patients received continuous-infusion 5-FU (200-300 mg/m(2)) with concurrent radiotherapy (30 Gy in 10 fractions). Radiotherapy was delivered to the primary tumor and regional lymphatics. Patients receiving gemcitabine and those receiving 5-FU had a similar mean Karnofsky performance status (KPS, 89% vs. 86%), distribution of tumor grade (43% vs. 33% poorly differentiated), and percent weight loss (all p = NS). However, patients treated with gemcitabine had a significantly larger median maximum cross-sectional tumor area (TA, 8.8 cm(2) vs. 5.7 cm(2), p = 0.046) and were significantly younger (median age 60 vs. 68 years, p <0.001). Severe acute toxicity (ST) was defined as toxicity requiring a hospital stay of more than 5 days, mucosal ulceration with bleeding, more than 3 dose deletions of gemcitabine or discontinuation of 5-FU, or toxicity resulting in surgical intervention or death. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to calculate the actuarial rate of local progression on imaging (LP), the rate of distant metastasis (DM), and the overall survival (OS) rate. The imaging was reviewed in resected patients. RESULTS Patients receiving gemcitabine developed significantly more ST during treatment (23% vs. 2%, p < 0.0001) than did those receiving 5-FU. Patients treated with gemcitabine had a similar 10-month LP rate (62% vs. 61%), 10-month DM rate (55% vs. 47%), 1-year OS rate (42% vs. 28%), and median OS duration (11 months vs. 9 months) to patients treated with 5 FU (all p = NS). Five patients who received gemcitabine and 1 patient who received 5-FU underwent margin-negative pancreaticoduodenectomy after chemoradiation. Three patients had a short segment (<or= 1 cm in length) of low-density tumor abutting the SMA, 1 had involvement of the common hepatic artery, and 1 had a short-segment occlusion of the superior mesenteric vein, amenable to venous resection and reconstruction. The other patient was thought to have inflammatory changes discontiguous with the tumor surrounding the SMA, which resolved after therapy. TA >10 cm(2) (p = 0.03) and poor differentiation (p = 0.07) were associated with a worse survival duration; however, other factors, such as KPS and weight loss >10% and age did not influence OS. CONCLUSION Despite the selection of healthier patients to receive gemcitabine, there was a significantly higher severe toxicity rate than with 5-FU. The median and 1-year survivals were not significantly different with the use of concurrent gemcitabine; however, the tumors treated were significantly larger. Additionally, a small number of patients with minimal arterial involvement whose disease met our radiographic definition of unresectable disease had margin-negative resections after treatment with gemcitabine-based chemoradiation. These possible benefits and the high rate of severe toxicity define a very narrow therapeutic index for concurrent gemcitabine-based chemoradiation given by this schedule of administration.