Induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an effective and well-tolerated treatment
Induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an effective and well-tolerated treatment
Aims: the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer varies enormously both within the UK and internationally. Although chemoradiation is the treatment of choice in the USA, in the UK this modality is used infrequently because of concerns regarding both its efficacy and its toxicity. We reviewed our experience with induction chemotherapy and selective chemoradiation in an attempt to show that it is a well-tolerated treatment that may be superior to chemotherapy alone.
Materials and methods: case notes of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer referred to the Velindre Cancer Centre between 1 March 2005 and 31 October 2007 were reviewed. Data on patient demographics, tumour characteristics, treatment and overall survival were collected retrospectively. Toxicity data during chemoradiation were collected prospectively. Patients who had non-progressive disease after 3 months of chemotherapy were planned for chemoradiation using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to a total dose of 4500–5040 cGy in 25–28 daily fractions with gemcitabine as a radiosensitiser.
Results: of the 91 referrals, 69 (76%) were fit for active oncological treatment; 43/69 (62%) patients were considered for induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and 16/43 (37%) patients received chemoradiation. The median overall survival for patients receiving primary chemotherapy (n = 26) was 9.2 (6.8–11.9) months and was 15.3 (11.6–upper limit not reached) months for patients who received chemoradiation (n = 16). During the induction chemotherapy 8/16 (50%) patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity and there were five hospital admissions. During chemoradiation there were 6/16 (37.5%) cases of grade 3/4 toxicity and two hospital admissions. There were no treatment-related deaths. Overall, 94.5% of the intended radiotherapy dose and 84% of the concurrent chemotherapy dose was delivered.
Conclusions: in this UK network, about half of patients were considered for chemoradiation, but only 18% received it. Survival and treatment-related toxicity are consistent with data from other chemoradiation trials and in our series chemoradiation was tolerated better than chemotherapy alone. This supports the view that ‘consolidation’ chemoradiation is a viable treatment option that should be considered in selected patients with locally advanced non-metastatic pancreatic cancer.
27-35
Hudson, E.
f3298804-a298-4fcf-9c00-ab554501a3a0
Hurt, C.
bf8b37a0-8f08-4b47-b3f3-6fc65f7ab87f
Mort, D.
5abba46c-943a-43ed-ad7e-54f6e5f149fb
Brewster, A.E.
0b97db63-a587-4efc-8165-8c47ec802906
Iqbal, N.
c500603c-7232-446e-a7b1-774a88cdc48f
Joseph, G.
8ee5391b-374f-456c-9a53-80c05107f0e7
Crosby, T.D.L.
151efb37-49f4-4d86-bb45-c28a0d3b8614
Mukherjee, S.
99536b35-b166-4011-9b61-97ee6facecc7
February 2010
Hudson, E.
f3298804-a298-4fcf-9c00-ab554501a3a0
Hurt, C.
bf8b37a0-8f08-4b47-b3f3-6fc65f7ab87f
Mort, D.
5abba46c-943a-43ed-ad7e-54f6e5f149fb
Brewster, A.E.
0b97db63-a587-4efc-8165-8c47ec802906
Iqbal, N.
c500603c-7232-446e-a7b1-774a88cdc48f
Joseph, G.
8ee5391b-374f-456c-9a53-80c05107f0e7
Crosby, T.D.L.
151efb37-49f4-4d86-bb45-c28a0d3b8614
Mukherjee, S.
99536b35-b166-4011-9b61-97ee6facecc7
et al.
(2010)
Induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an effective and well-tolerated treatment.
Clinical Oncology, 22 (1), .
(doi:10.1016/j.clon.2009.09.024).
Abstract
Aims: the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer varies enormously both within the UK and internationally. Although chemoradiation is the treatment of choice in the USA, in the UK this modality is used infrequently because of concerns regarding both its efficacy and its toxicity. We reviewed our experience with induction chemotherapy and selective chemoradiation in an attempt to show that it is a well-tolerated treatment that may be superior to chemotherapy alone.
Materials and methods: case notes of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer referred to the Velindre Cancer Centre between 1 March 2005 and 31 October 2007 were reviewed. Data on patient demographics, tumour characteristics, treatment and overall survival were collected retrospectively. Toxicity data during chemoradiation were collected prospectively. Patients who had non-progressive disease after 3 months of chemotherapy were planned for chemoradiation using three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy to a total dose of 4500–5040 cGy in 25–28 daily fractions with gemcitabine as a radiosensitiser.
Results: of the 91 referrals, 69 (76%) were fit for active oncological treatment; 43/69 (62%) patients were considered for induction chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation and 16/43 (37%) patients received chemoradiation. The median overall survival for patients receiving primary chemotherapy (n = 26) was 9.2 (6.8–11.9) months and was 15.3 (11.6–upper limit not reached) months for patients who received chemoradiation (n = 16). During the induction chemotherapy 8/16 (50%) patients experienced grade 3/4 toxicity and there were five hospital admissions. During chemoradiation there were 6/16 (37.5%) cases of grade 3/4 toxicity and two hospital admissions. There were no treatment-related deaths. Overall, 94.5% of the intended radiotherapy dose and 84% of the concurrent chemotherapy dose was delivered.
Conclusions: in this UK network, about half of patients were considered for chemoradiation, but only 18% received it. Survival and treatment-related toxicity are consistent with data from other chemoradiation trials and in our series chemoradiation was tolerated better than chemotherapy alone. This supports the view that ‘consolidation’ chemoradiation is a viable treatment option that should be considered in selected patients with locally advanced non-metastatic pancreatic cancer.
This record has no associated files available for download.
More information
Accepted/In Press date: 10 September 2009
e-pub ahead of print date: 5 November 2009
Published date: February 2010
Identifiers
Local EPrints ID: 488243
URI: http://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/488243
ISSN: 0936-6555
PURE UUID: 87ae0f6d-1f02-4d27-807c-2995acb803a1
Catalogue record
Date deposited: 19 Mar 2024 17:35
Last modified: 23 Mar 2024 03:13
Export record
Altmetrics
Contributors
Author:
E. Hudson
Author:
C. Hurt
Author:
D. Mort
Author:
A.E. Brewster
Author:
N. Iqbal
Author:
G. Joseph
Author:
T.D.L. Crosby
Author:
S. Mukherjee
Corporate Author: et al.
Download statistics
Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.
View more statistics