Treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer: the role of radiation therapy

Pancreatic cancer remains associated with an extremely poor prognosis. Surgical resection can be curative, but the majority of patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease. Treatment for patients with locally advanced disease is controversial. Therapeutic options include systemic therapy alone, concurrent chemoradiation, or induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation. We review the evidence to date regarding the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), as well as evolving strategies including the emerging role of targeted therapies. We propose that if radiation is used for patients with LAPC, it should be delivered with concurrent chemotherapy and following a period of induction chemotherapy.     

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer: An emerging entity

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly fatal disease that is increasing in incidence. PDAC can be classified according to resectability status with 3 nonmetastatic groups defined: resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced PDAC (LAPC). Delineating these subtypes is important with the optimal treatment approach dictated by high-quality CT imaging and multidisciplinary team discussion. Patients with LAPC are thought unresectable and are therefore rarely cured. In these patients, chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Aggressive approaches in this cohort are increasingly employed. Local therapies after induction chemotherapy including standard fractionation radiation, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT), and irreversible electroporation (IRE) are being investigated in an attempt to improve long-term control. In some cases, responses to neoadjuvant therapy may facilitate surgical resection. Biomarkers that can select patients most likely to benefit from these options are urgently needed. This review aims to highlight the emerging treatment of patients with LAPC and to discuss current trials.     

Neoadjuvant treatment of borderline resectable and non-resectable pancreatic cancer

Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly becoming a valid treatment option for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). In borderline resectable disease, neoadjuvant therapy is employed to improve the probability of margin-clear resections. In non-metastatic, non-resectable pancreatic cancer, treatment primarily aims to induce disease control, but may achieve conversion to surgical resectability in some patients. Several treatment modalities including chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy (CRT) or the sequential use of both have been investigated in numerous, mostly small and non-randomized studies. Nevertheless, there is a consistent finding that neoadjuvant therapy can induce resectability in up to 30%–40% of LAPC patients. Once resection has been achieved, overall survival appears to be comparable to that observed for primarily resectable patients. Thus, patient selection evolves as an important aspect of neoadjuvant therapy; retrospective analyses identified induction chemotherapy as an appropriate tool to define LAPC patients who may benefit most from subsequent treatment with CRT. The clinical importance of induction chemotherapy may further increase once highly active protocols such as the FOLFIRINOX or the gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel regimen are introduced into novel multimodality treatment concepts.     

Radiation dose responses for chemoradiation therapy of pancreatic cancer: An analysis of compiled clinical data using biophysical models

PurposeWe analyzed recent clinical data obtained from chemoradiation of unresectable, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) in order to examine possible benefits from radiation therapy dose escalation.Methods and MaterialsA modified linear quadratic model was used to fit clinical tumor response and survival data of chemoradiation treatments for LAPC reported from 20 institutions. Biophysical radiosensitivity parameters were extracted from the fits.ResultsExamination of the clinical data demonstrated an enhancement in tumor response with higher irradiation dose, an important clinical result for palliation and quality of life. Little indication of improvement in 1-year survival with increased radiation dose was observed. Possible dose escalation schemes are proposed based on calculations of the biologically effective dose required for a 50% tumor response rate.ConclusionsBased on the evaluation of tumor response data, the escalation of radiation dose presents potential clinical benefits which when combined with normal tissue complication analyses may result in improved treatment outcome for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients.     

Multiagent Chemotherapy and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Patients with Unresectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Prospective Nonrandomized Controlled Trial

PurposeIn a prospective multicenter study, gemcitabine monotherapy followed by stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) was well tolerated with outcomes comparable to chemoradiation for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Recent trials have reported improved survival with multiagent chemotherapy (MA-CTX) alone. This prospective trial explored whether SBRT could be safely delivered after MA-CTX. Herein, we report the long-term outcomes of adding SBRT after MA-CTX in LAPC patients and evaluate whether genetic profiles of specimens obtained before SBRT influence outcomes.Methods and MaterialsThis prospective nonrandomized controlled phase 2 trial enrolled 44 LAPC and 4 locally recurrent patients after multidisciplinary evaluation between 2012 and 2015 at a high-volume pancreatic cancer center. For induction CTX, most received modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX), or gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel (GnP) followed by 5-fraction SBRT for all. During fiducial placement, biopsies were obtained with DNA extracted for targeted sequencing using the Memorial Sloan Kettering-Integrated Mutation Profiling of Actionable Cancer Targets platform.ResultsMedian induction CTX duration was ≥4 months, and 31 patients received mFFX (65%). Among 44 LAPC patients, 17 (39%) were surgically explored, and 12 of 16 (75%) achieved a R0 resection. Median overall survival (mOS) was 20.2 and 14.6 months from diagnosis and SBRT, respectively. One- and 2-year OS from SBRT was 58% and 28%. The mOS after resection was 28.6 and 22.4 months from diagnosis and SBRT, respectively. Median local progression-free survival was 23.9 and 15.8 months from diagnosis and SBRT, respectively. The mOS for pre-SBRT CA 19-9 ≤180 U/mL versus >180 was 23.1 and 11.3 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.53; P = .04). Only 1 patient (2.1%) had late grade ≥2 gastrointestinal toxic effects attributable to SBRT. Despite significant pretreatment with chemotherapy, 88% of tumor specimens were effectively sequenced; survival outcomes were not significantly associated with specific mutational patterns. Quality of life was prospectively collected pre- and post-SBRT with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and PAN26 questionnaires showing no significant change.ConclusionsSBRT was safely administered with MA-CTX with minimal toxicity. A high proportion of LAPC patients underwent R0 resection with favorable survival outcomes.     

Favorable tumor biology in locally advanced pancreatic cancer—beyond CA19-9

Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are frequently staged as unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) at the time of diagnosis. Recently, the administration of multi-agent induction chemotherapy has resulted in treatment response in up to 60% of these patients rendering their tumors technically resectable. Operative strategies have evolved to allow for successful oncologic resection of LAPC. These technically complex procedures involving vascular resections and reconstructions are now being performed with increasing safety at high-volume centers. However, even after induction therapy and successful resection, disease recurrence sometimes occurs early on, limiting the benefit of resecting the local tumor. Therefore, selection of surgical candidates should factor in each patient’s tumor biology which could result in accurate treatment guidance to improve patient outcomes while avoiding overtreatment. Well-informed patient selection is critical to improve outcomes in LAPC. Multidisciplinary teams have to determine the appropriate care for LAPC patients at the time of reevaluation after administration of induction chemotherapy. At this point the concept of favorable vs. unfavorable tumor biology becomes highly relevant and having access to biomarkers that are predictive of tumor behavior are of paramount importance. Currently, CA19-9 remains the only clinically utilized biomarker for PDAC, however, its use is limited by factors discussed in this review. While CA19-9 holds value in patient assessment, additional biomarkers are required that could supplement and improve the current ability to classify tumor biology and predict behavior in individual patients. Recent investigations on the use of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) using liquid biopsies, as well as patient-derived organoids to characterize tumor biology have shown promise in achieving precise tumor biology-based patient stratification. Serial assessment of these biomarkers throughout therapy could supplement or even replace the anatomic criteria for resectability in the future.     

局部晚期胰腺癌SBRT剂量分割模式研究进展

对于局部晚期胰腺癌(LAPC) SBRT能提高肿瘤LC率,降低胃肠道不良反应发生率,但目前剂量分割模式并不明确。国外LAPC的治疗经历了从常规剂量分割到单次大剂量再到低分割、高分次剂量的演变,国内也从常规剂量分割演变为低分割、高分次剂量模式。依据目前的放射生物学原理及临床研究,6~7次分割、隔日照射的模式可能是一个较好的选择。目前对SBRT并没有更加合适的剂量转换模型,LQ模型依然是最简单实用的模型。SBRT生物学机制既符合临床实践又简单易懂的放射生物学模型是今后的研究方向。     

Optimizing the management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer with a focus on induction chemotherapy: Expert opinion based on a review of current evidence

Surgical resection of pancreatic cancer offers a chance of cure, but currently only 15–20% of patients are diagnosed with resectable disease, while 30–40% are diagnosed with non-metastatic, unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). Treatment for LAPC usually involves systemic chemotherapy, with the aim of controlling disease progression, reducing symptoms and maintaining quality of life. In a small proportion of patients with LAPC, primary chemotherapy may successfully convert unresectable tumours to resectable tumours. In this setting, primary chemotherapy is termed ‘induction therapy’ rather than ‘neoadjuvant’. There is currently a lack of data from randomized studies to thoroughly evaluate the benefits of induction chemotherapy in LAPC, but Phase II and retrospective data have shown improved survival and high R0 resection rates. New chemotherapy regimens such as nab–paclitaxel + gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX have demonstrated improvement in overall survival for metastatic disease and shown promise as neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable and borderline resectable disease. Prospective trials are underway to evaluate these regimens further as induction therapy in LAPC and preliminary data indicate a beneficial effect of FOLFIRINOX in this setting. Further research into optimal induction schedules is needed, as well as guidance on the patients who are most suitable for induction therapy. In this expert opinion article, a panel of surgeons, medical oncologists and gastrointestinal oncologists review the available evidence on management strategies for LAPC and provide their recommendations for patient care, with a particular focus on the use of induction chemotherapy.     

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer: recent progress and future directions

Despite advances in surgical, medical, and radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer, the prognosis remains poor. At this time, the only chance for long-term survival is surgical resection. More challenging is the optimal management of unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer, which has historically been treated with concurrent chemoradiation or chemotherapy alone. However, the survival and local control benefit of conventional radiotherapy in addition to chemotherapy was unclear. More recently, stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is emerging as a viable approach to maximizing local tumor control with a tolerable side effect profile. SBRT achieves sharp dose fall-off facilitating safe delivery of highly focused radiation to the tumor over 1-5 days. Although the optimal regimen of pancreas SBRT has not yet been established, its short treatment course limits the delay of additional. Future directions involve prospective study of pancreas SBRT and exploration of biomarkers and imaging technology in order to adopt a personalized management paradigm.     

Radiotherapy technical considerations in the management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer: American-French consensus recommendations

Pancreatic carcinoma is a leading cause of cancer-related mortality. Approximately 30% of pancreatic cancer patients present with locally advanced, unresectable nonmetastatic disease. For these patients, two therapeutic options exist: systemic chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. Within this context, the optimal technique for pancreatic irradiation is not clearly defined. A search to identify relevant studies was undertaken using the Medline database. All Phase III randomized trials evaluating the modalities of radiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer were included, as were some noncontrolled Phase II and retrospective studies. An expert panel convened with members of the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and GERCOR cooperative groups to review identified studies and prepare the guidelines. Each member of the working group independently evaluated five endpoints: total dose, target volume definition, radiotherapy planning technique, dose constraints to organs at risk, and quality assurance. Based on this analysis of the literature, we recommend either three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy or intensity-modulated radiation therapy to a total dose of 50 to 54 Gy at 1.8 to 2 Gy per fraction. We propose gross tumor volume identification to be followed by an expansion of 1.5 to 2 cm anteriorly, posteriorly, and laterally, and 2 to 3 cm craniocaudally to generate the planning target volume. The craniocaudal margins can be reduced with the use of respiratory gating. Organs at risk are liver, kidneys, spinal cord, stomach, and small bowel. Stereotactic body radiation therapy should not be used for pancreatic cancer outside of clinical trials. Radiotherapy quality assurance is mandatory in clinical trials. These consensus recommendations are proposed for use in the development of future trials testing new chemotherapy combinations with radiotherapy. Not all of these recommendations will be appropriate for trials testing radiotherapy dose or dose intensity concepts.     

Rationale for different chemotherapeutic and radiation therapy strategies in cancer management

The two primary therapeutic strategies in cancer have been to give either chemotherapy and radiation therapy together or give a complete course of one treatment modality before starting the second. Clinical studies show that toxicity has been one of the major deterrents to substantial improvements in cancer management when the two modalities are administered together. On the other hand, the prolonged time necessary to administer all of one modality followed by the other makes it likely that repopulation of the tumor during sequential treatment will diminish therapeutic effectiveness. A third strategy of giving chemotherapy and radiation therapy has been developed. This new regimen was designed to give chemotherapy initially, maintain the chemotherapy schedule to avoid any reduction in its effectiveness, and add radiation therapy as early as possible in between courses of chemotherapy to minimize the development of cross resistance. One of the primary objectives of alternating chemotherapy and radiation therapy is to increase the therapeutic index by reducing toxicity without a significant reduction in therapeutic effectiveness. Recent clinical, experimental, and theoretic results with radiation therapy and chemotherapy for cancer management emphasize the necessity of giving both modalities with the greatest intensity possible in the initial phase of induction therapy. Cancer treatment scheduling determines the toxicity and thereby limits the dose intensity that can be tolerated. Scheduling may also govern the antitumor effect directly; however, normal host tissue makes the determination of the direct effects on the tumor difficult, if not impossible, in clinical studies. Well-defined experimental solid-tumor systems provide the means for determining directly the relationship between toxicity and antitumor effects in relation to tumor burden and total therapeutic dose. In addition, its relationship to dose intensity and scheduling can be determined by the using more sophisticated research techniques, such as response surface methods. Well-defined clinical protocols to determine how to interact chemotherapy with radiation therapy more effectively hold considerable potential for rapid improvement in treatment of radiosensitive and chemosensitive cancers.     

Primary endocrine therapy in locally advanced breast cancers--the Nottingham experience

Introduction There are trials comparing different neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimens for locally advanced primary breast cancer (LAPC). Few studies have evaluated alternative therapeutic approaches towards LAPC. A previous trial from our institute in LAPC patients unselected for oestrogen receptor (ER) status, comparing primary endocrine therapy versus multimodal treatment, showed no difference in breast cancer related deaths or overall survival. We report our experience of primary endocrine therapy in ER+ LAPC. Methods Between 1988 and 2007, 195 ER+, non-inflammatory LAPC patients were treated with primary endocrine agents in our institute, due to patient choice, being unfit for chemotherapy, or recruitment into the above mentioned trial. All patients had disease assessable by UICC criteria. Results Median age was 69 years. The median follow-up was 61 months. 154 patients (79%) received endocrine treatment alone. 185 patients (95%) derived clinical benefit (complete response/ partial response/ stable disease) for ≥6 months from primary endocrine therapy. Overall 5-year survival was 76% and 5-year breast cancer specific survival was 86%. Conclusion In selected group of ER+ LAPC patients, primary endocrine treatment achieves excellent survival outcome and is a viable alternative to other modalities of treatment.     

Neoadjuvant treatment of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is one of the deadliest malignancies worldwide and its incidence is rising in the United States. The only potential curative treatment for this disease is surgical resection, however, due to the lack of an effective screening strategy, the majority of patients present with advanced or metastatic disease which preclude resectability. Further, the best clinical outcomes occur in those patients that receive multimodality treatment with surgical resection combined with chemotherapy with or without the addition of radiation therapy. Despite decades of innovation in treatment modalities, including chemotherapy, radiation therapy and advancements in surgical techniques, the long term outcomes for this disease remain poor with high rates of both local and distant recurrence despite curative intent treatment. The dismal outcomes of this disease highlight the dire need for more effective treatment strategies and therapeutics. This review focuses on the treatment of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma with an in depth review of the literature to support the use of chemotherapy in the adjuvant and neoadjuvant setting in this disease and exploration and discussion of the growing paradigm shift to neoadjuvant treatment. Further, this review highlights the ongoing and planned clinical trials evaluating neoadjuvant treatment strategies and novel therapeutics in localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma.     

Induction chemotherapy selects patients with locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer for optimal benefit from consolidative chemoradiation therapy

BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to determine whether there were differences in outcome for patients with unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) who received treatment with chemoradiation therapy (CR) versus induction chemotherapy followed by CR (CCR). METHODS: Between December 1993 and July 2005, 323 consecutive patients with LAPC were treated at the authors' institution with radiotherapy and concurrent gemcitabine or fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. Two hundred forty-seven patients received CR as initial treatment, and 76 patients received a median of 2.5 months of gemcitabine-based induction chemotherapy prior to CR. Most patients received a radiation dose of 30 grays in 10 fractions (85%) concurrently with infusional 5-fluorouracil (41%), gemcitabine (39%), or capecitabine (20%). RESULTS: The median follow-up was 5.5 months (range, 1-63 months). For all patients, the median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 9 months and 5 months, respectively, and the 2-year estimated OS and PFS rates were 9% and 5%, respectively. The median OS and PFS were 8.5 months and 4.2 months, respectively, in the CR group and 11.9 months and 6.4 months, respectively, in the CCR group (both P < .001). The median times to local and distant progression were 6.0 months and 5.6 months, respectively, in the CR group and 8.9 and 9.5 months, respectively, in the CCR group (P = .003 and P = .007, respectively). There was no significant difference in the patterns of failure with the use of induction chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The results from this analysis indicated that, by excluding patients with rapid distant progression, induction chemotherapy may select patients with LAPC for optimal benefit from consolidative CR. The authors believe that this strategy of enriching the population of patients who receive a locoregional treatment modality merits prospective randomized evaluation.     

Current treatment of osteosarcoma

A comprehensive multidisciplinary approach has transformed osteosarcoma from a disease with a modest long-term survival to one in which at least two-thirds of patients will be cured. Surgery remains the vital modality for treating the primary tumor, whereas adjuvant chemotherapy plays an essential role in the control of subclinical metastatic disease. Complete surgical excision of the primary tumor remains an essential element of treatment. For many patients, a combination of advances in surgical technique, improved imaging modalities to accurately document tumor extent, and the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has made limb salvage procedures a safe alternative to amputation. In some patients for whom complete surgical excision is impossible, the addition of radiation therapy may allow local tumor control. The most effective chemotherapy agents currently in use include high-dose methotrexate, doxorubicin, cisplatin, and ifosfamide/etoposide. The optimal schedule of therapy is still being investigated, as is the role of dose intensification. Unfortunately, some groups of patients remain at high risk of eventual relapse. Those whose tumors show relatively low degrees of necrosis after administration of chemotherapy have poorer survival than patients with more chemotherapy-responsive tumors. Similarly, patients who present with overt metastatic disease (particularly bone metastases), as well as patients with tumors that recur after treatment, continue to have an unsatisfactory outcome. These groups, in particular, may benefit from future investigations into novel agents, such as biological response modifiers, antiangiogenesis factors, and growth receptor modulation.     

Radiation therapy for lung cancer

Radiation therapy is one of the most important modalities for the treatment of lung cancer. Current progress of radiation therapy in cooperation with the development of physics and biology is remarkable. The techniques of three-dimensional treatment planning and three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) have facilitated the use of higher radiation doses. Patients with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) are candidates for curative surgical resection. However, the number of elderly patients has been increasing, and these patients often have medical contraindications that prevent curative surgery. Recently, several clinical trials on stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) using the 3D-CRT technique for solitary lung tumors have been reported. The local control rate for stage I disease is more than 90%, and survival rates are promising. Now a prospective multi-institutional trial is ongoing to determine whether this modality can become a standard treatment for inoperable patients or an alternative to lobetectomy. For locally advanced NSCLC, unfortunately, recent studies have demonstrated that conventional therapies may have reached a therapeutic plateau. Now several radiation dose escalation studies utilizing conventional fractionation and 3D-CRT techniques are ongoing. The strategies of almost all of these trials are to eliminate elective nodal irradiation and deliver a higher dose of radiation to gross tumor volume while sparing normal tissues. Preliminary experience has resulted in promising survival, but should be developed to integrate into the combined treatment to completely control both local disease and other microscopically involved lesions. The combination of novel chemotherapeutic agents and molecular targeting therapies with radiation therapy is being investigated. Development of molecular imaging techniques is expected to facilitate more selective dose escalation in tumors.     

Radiation and third-generation chemotherapy

All of the third-generation chemotherapeutic agents reviewed in this article are independently active against NSCLC, although the agents differ significantly in their cellular and molecular mechanisms of cytotoxicity. All have also been shown to potentiate radiation effects, and thus are promising in exerting further cytotoxicity when used in combination chemoradiation therapy for locally advanced NSCLC. Although the toxicity to normal tissue varies among these agents when used alone, phase I/II clinical results consistently demonstrated higher risk and severity of esophagitis and pneumonitis when these agents were administered concurrently with thoracic radiation. These results were consistent with the radiosensitization properties of all these agents. Nonetheless, most chemoradiation combinations have been made feasible through careful phase I studies that establish safe doses of these agents given concurrently with radiation. Indeed, phase I outcomes consistently have demonstrated the need for dose reduction compared with doses applied in the stage IV, metastatic disease setting (see Tables 1 and 2). There have been many different dose schedules in phase I/II studies for stage III NSCLC, and most have yielded improved response rates with these agents. For all these agents discussed, multiagent chemoradiation increased toxicity when compared with single agent chemoradiation, particularly in the risk of neutropenia, and the tumor response rates were no better than single-agent chemoradiation. Most studies have not reached an adequate interval for survival endpoint to assess the impact on survival using multiagent chemoradiation. A few earlier studies using paclitaxel chemoradiation, in fact, showed that the significant improvement in tumor response rate resulted in only a small gain in survival outcome. Despite much preclinical research conducted with these agents, the optimal sequence and dose of drug and the optimal schedule for combining the two modalities remain unknown. Optimal sequencing of the chemoradiation regimens may improve distant disease control and primary tumor control, as was seen in studies that administered both full-dose induction chemotherapy and concurrent chemoradiation at reduced drug dose and in studies that administered consolidative, full-dose chemotherapy after chemoradiation. Strategically altering the treatment schedule may also enhance the radiosensitizing effects while keeping toxicity low, such as was seen in the pulsed low-dose paclitaxel chemoradiation reported by Chen et al . This pulsed low-dose schedule resulted in superior tumor response (100%) and durable primary tumor control while keeping the toxicity low. Other methods to minimize normal tissue injury and to deliver higher radiation doses, such as conformal three-dimensional radiotherapy that excludes nontarget tissues from the radiation field, are under investigation. Marks and colleagues were able to deliver radiation to 80 Gy using accelerated hyperfractionation radiation after induction chemotherapy. Intensity-modulated radiotherapy is expected to revolutionize the targeting of tumor and exclusion of normal tissues from the high-dose radiation volume in the future. Integrating biologic response modifiers, radioprotectors, and molecular targeting strategies also are being investigated. It remains unclear which agent among the third-generation drugs performs better for combination chemoradiation. The CALGB 9431 study reported by Vokes et al provided some preliminary information, in that it was a randomized phase II study of a three-arm comparison of cisplatin-containing, two-drug combination chemoradiation with one of the third-generation agents. Although direct statistical comparison between the treatment arms was not valid for a phase II setting, such an analysis did indeed reveal similar overall response rates for these three arms. Chemoradiation using third-generation chemotherapeutic agents has improved local tumor response rates, with enhanced radiation toxicity such as esophagitis and pneumonitis. The challenge of targeting distant disease control for locally advanced NSCLC continues.     

Treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer in the real world: population-based practices and effectiveness.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the use and effectiveness of cancer-directed therapy in elderly patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). METHODS: We used the linked Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Medicare database to perform a retrospective cohort study in 1,696 patients diagnosed with LAPC between 1991 and 1996. We calculated cancer-directed treatment use rates, then used logistic regression to identify patient and health system factors that were associated with receipt of treatment. Effectiveness of treatment was estimated using Cox proportional hazards models and propensity score methods. RESULTS: In our cohort, 44% of patients received some form of cancer-directed therapy (24% radiation with concurrent chemotherapy, 13% radiation alone, and 7% chemotherapy alone). Older age, lower socioeconomic status, presence of comorbid illness, no care in a teaching hospital, and residence in the western United States were associated with a lower likelihood of receiving treatment (P 相似文献   

Hormonal, radiation and combined therapy of locally advanced prostatic cancer (T3NXM0)

The analysis is presented of combined treatment of locally advanced prostatic cancer (LAPC), stage T3NXM0, in 158 LAPC patients treated in 1998-2002. The patients were divided into four groups: group 1 (n=72) received hormones in parallel with radiation, group 2 (n=52) received only hormones, group 3 (n=27) received radiotherapy after failure of long-term (1 year and more) hormone therapy, group 4 (n=7) was given teleradiotherapy only. 3-year recurrence-free survival in patients with LAPC showed advantage of the combined treatment (82 +/- 0.1%) vs hormone (56 +/- 0.1%) or radiation (69.3 +/- 0.1%) therapy alone. It provides a high local control over the primary tumor and an increase of survival, prolongs distant metastases free period, improves the patients' quality of life and their adaptation.