Pick Topic
Review Topic
List Experts
Examine Expert
Save Expert
  Site Guide ··   
Pancreatic Neoplasms: HELP
Articles by Franck Bonnetain
Based on 24 articles published since 2008
||||

Between 2008 and 2019, F. Bonnetain wrote the following 24 articles about Pancreatic Neoplasms.
 
+ Citations + Abstracts
1 Guideline Consensus statement on mandatory measurements in pancreatic cancer trials (COMM-PACT) for systemic treatment of unresectable disease. 2018

Ter Veer, Emil / van Rijssen, L Bengt / Besselink, Marc G / Mali, Rosa M A / Berlin, Jordan D / Boeck, Stefan / Bonnetain, Franck / Chau, Ian / Conroy, Thierry / Van Cutsem, Eric / Deplanque, Gael / Friess, Helmut / Glimelius, Bengt / Goldstein, David / Herrmann, Richard / Labianca, Roberto / Van Laethem, Jean-Luc / Macarulla, Teresa / van der Meer, Jonathan H M / Neoptolemos, John P / Okusaka, Takuji / O'Reilly, Eileen M / Pelzer, Uwe / Philip, Philip A / van der Poel, Marcel J / Reni, Michele / Scheithauer, Werner / Siveke, Jens T / Verslype, Chris / Busch, Olivier R / Wilmink, Johanna W / van Oijen, Martijn G H / van Laarhoven, Hanneke W M. ·Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. · Department of Surgery, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. · Department of Medicine, Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA. · Department of Internal Medicine III, Comprehensive Cancer Center, Klinikum Grosshadern, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany. · Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London and Surrey, UK. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine and Lorraine University, Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Gasthuisberg Leuven and KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. · Department of Oncology, Hôpital Riviera-Chablais, Vevey, Switzerland. · Department of Surgery, Technical University of Munich, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany. · Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. · Nelune Cancer Centre, Prince of Wales Hospital, Prince of Wales Clinical School University of New South Wales, Randwick, NSW, Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland. · Cancer Center, ASST Papa Giovanni XXIII, Bergamo, Italy. · Department of Gastroenterology, Gastrointestinal Cancer Unit, Erasme University Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. · Vall d'Hebron University Hospital (HUVH), Vall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain. · Department of Molecular and Clinical Cancer Medicine, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK. · Department of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. · Gastrointestinal Oncology Service, Division of Solid Tumor Oncology, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, NY, USA. · Department of Hematology, Oncology and Tumor Immunology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Freie Universität Berlin, Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin, Berlin, Germany; Berlin Institute of Health, Berlin, Germany. · Department of Oncology, Karmanos Cancer Center, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI, USA. · Department of Medical Oncology, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. · Department of Internal Medicine I, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria. · Division of Solid Tumor Translational Oncology, West German Cancer Cancer, University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany; German Cancer Consortium (DKTK, partner site Essen) and German Cancer Research Center, DKFZ, Heidelberg, Germany. · Department of Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. · Department of Medical Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Electronic address: h.vanlaarhoven@amc.uva.nl. ·Lancet Oncol · Pubmed #29508762.

ABSTRACT: Variations in the reporting of potentially confounding variables in studies investigating systemic treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer pose challenges in drawing accurate comparisons between findings. In this Review, we establish the first international consensus on mandatory baseline and prognostic characteristics in future trials for the treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. We did a systematic literature search to find phase 3 trials investigating first-line systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify baseline characteristics and prognostic variables. We created a structured overview showing the reporting frequencies of baseline characteristics and the prognostic relevance of identified variables. We used a modified Delphi panel of two rounds involving an international panel of 23 leading medical oncologists in the field of pancreatic cancer to develop a consensus on the various variables identified. In total, 39 randomised controlled trials that had data on 15 863 patients were included, of which 32 baseline characteristics and 26 prognostic characteristics were identified. After two consensus rounds, 23 baseline characteristics and 12 prognostic characteristics were designated as mandatory for future pancreatic cancer trials. The COnsensus statement on Mandatory Measurements in unresectable PAncreatic Cancer Trials (COMM-PACT) identifies a mandatory set of baseline and prognostic characteristics to allow adequate comparison of outcomes between pancreatic cancer studies.

2 Guideline Guidelines for time-to-event end-point definitions in trials for pancreatic cancer. Results of the DATECAN initiative (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials). 2014

Bonnetain, Franck / Bonsing, Bert / Conroy, Thierry / Dousseau, Adelaide / Glimelius, Bengt / Haustermans, Karin / Lacaine, François / Van Laethem, Jean Luc / Aparicio, Thomas / Aust, Daniela / Bassi, Claudio / Berger, Virginie / Chamorey, Emmanuel / Chibaudel, Benoist / Dahan, Laeticia / De Gramont, Aimery / Delpero, Jean Robert / Dervenis, Christos / Ducreux, Michel / Gal, Jocelyn / Gerber, Erich / Ghaneh, Paula / Hammel, Pascal / Hendlisz, Alain / Jooste, Valérie / Labianca, Roberto / Latouche, Aurelien / Lutz, Manfred / Macarulla, Teresa / Malka, David / Mauer, Muriel / Mitry, Emmanuel / Neoptolemos, John / Pessaux, Patrick / Sauvanet, Alain / Tabernero, Josep / Taieb, Julien / van Tienhoven, Geertjan / Gourgou-Bourgade, Sophie / Bellera, Carine / Mathoulin-Pélissier, Simone / Collette, Laurence. ·Methodology and Quality of Life Unit in Cancer, EA 3181, University Hospital of Besançon and CTD-INCa Gercor, UNICNCER GERICO, Besançon, France. Electronic address: franck.bonnetain@univ-fcomte.fr. · Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Vandoeuvre-les-Nancy, France. · Bordeaux Segalen University & CHRU, Bordeaux, France. · Department of Radiology, Oncology and Radiation Science, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Leuven, Belgium. · Digestive Surgical Department, Tenon hospital, Paris, France. · Gastro Intestinal Cancer Unit Erasme Hospital Brussels, Belgium. · Gastroenterology Department, Avicenne Hospital, Paris 13, Bobigny, France. · Institute for Pathology, University Hospital Carl-Gustav-Carus, Dresden, Germany. · Surgical and Gastroenterological Department, Endocrine and Pancreatic Unit, Hospital of 'G.B.Rossi', University of Verona, Italy. · Institut de Cancérologie de l'Ouest - Centre Paul Papin Centre de Lutte Contre le Cancer (CLCC), Angers, France. · Biostatistics Unit, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France. · Oncology Department, Hôpital Saint-Antoine & CTD-INCa GERCOR, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, UPMC Paris VI, Paris, France. · Gastroenterology Department, Hopital la Timone, Assitance publique des Hopitaux de Marseille, Marseille, France. · Department of Surgery, Institut Paoli Calmettes, Marseille, France. · Department of Surgery, Agia Olga Hospital, Athens, Greece. · Department of Gastroenterology, Institut Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. · Biostatistician, Biostatistics Unit, Centre Antoine Lacassagne, Nice, France. · Department of Radiotherapy, Institut fuer Radioonkologie, Vienna, Austria. · Department of Surgical Oncology, Royal Liverpool Hospital, United Kingdom. · Department of Gastroenterology, Beaujon Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. · Digestive Oncology and Gastro-enterology Department, Jules Bordet Institute, Brussels, Belgium. · Digestive Cancer Registry, INSERM U866, Dijon, France. · Medical Oncology Unit, Ospedali Riuniti di Bergamo, Bergame, Italy. · Inserm, Centre for Research in Epidemiology and Population Health, U1018, Biostatistics Team, Villejuif, France. · Gastroenterology Department, Caritas Hospital, Saarbrücken, Germany. · Department of the Gastrointestinal Tumors and Phase I Unit, Vall d'Hebron University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain. · Statistics Department, EORTC, Brussels, Belgium. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institut Curie, Hôpital René Huguenin, Saint-Cloud, France. · Division of Surgery and Oncology at the University of Liverpool and Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, United Kingdom. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Universitu Hospital Strasbourg, France. · Department of Hepato-pancreatic and Biliary Surgery, Beaujon Hospital, Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris, France. · Department of Hepato-gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Georges Pompidou European hospital, Paris, France. · Department of Radiation Oncology, Academisch Medisch Centrum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. · Institut Du Cancer de Montpellier, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, and Data Center for Cancer Clinical Trials, CTD-INCa, Montpellier, France. · Clinical and Epidemiological Research Unit, Institut Bergonie, Comprehensive Cancer Centre, Bordeaux, France; Data Center for Cancer Clinical Trials, CTD-INCa, Bordeaux, France; INSERM, Centre d'Investigation Clinique - Épidémiologie Clinique CIC-EC 7, F-33000 Bordeaux, France. ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #25256896.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Using potential surrogate end-points for overall survival (OS) such as Disease-Free- (DFS) or Progression-Free Survival (PFS) is increasingly common in randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, end-points are too often imprecisely defined which largely contributes to a lack of homogeneity across trials, hampering comparison between them. The aim of the DATECAN (Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event End-points in CANcer trials)-Pancreas project is to provide guidelines for standardised definition of time-to-event end-points in RCTs for pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Time-to-event end-points currently used were identified from a literature review of pancreatic RCT trials (2006-2009). Academic research groups were contacted for participation in order to select clinicians and methodologists to participate in the pilot and scoring groups (>30 experts). A consensus was built after 2 rounds of the modified Delphi formal consensus approach with the Rand scoring methodology (range: 1-9). RESULTS: For pancreatic cancer, 14 time to event end-points and 25 distinct event types applied to two settings (detectable disease and/or no detectable disease) were considered relevant and included in the questionnaire sent to 52 selected experts. Thirty experts answered both scoring rounds. A total of 204 events distributed over the 14 end-points were scored. After the first round, consensus was reached for 25 items; after the second consensus was reached for 156 items; and after the face-to-face meeting for 203 items. CONCLUSION: The formal consensus approach reached the elaboration of guidelines for standardised definitions of time-to-event end-points allowing cross-comparison of RCTs in pancreatic cancer.

3 Clinical Trial Nab-paclitaxel plus either gemcitabine or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil as first-line therapy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (AFUGEM GERCOR): a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial. 2017

Bachet, Jean-Baptiste / Hammel, Pascal / Desramé, Jérôme / Meurisse, Aurélia / Chibaudel, Benoist / André, Thierry / Debourdeau, Philippe / Dauba, Jérome / Lecomte, Thierry / Seitz, Jean-François / Tournigand, Christophe / Aparicio, Thomas / Meyer, Véronique Guerin / Taieb, Julien / Volet, Julien / Monier, Amandine / Bonnetain, Franck / Louvet, Christophe. ·Sorbonne Universités, UPMC Univ Paris 06, Paris, France; Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Groupe hospitalier Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris, France. Electronic address: jean-baptiste.bachet@aphp.fr. · Department of Digestive Oncology, Hôpital Beaujon, Paris, France. · Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Hôpital Privé Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France. · Department of Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology, INSERM UMR 1098, Hôpital Universitaire de Besancon, Paris, France. · Department of Oncology, Institut Franco-Britannique, Levallois-Perret, Paris, France. · Department of Oncology, Hôpital Saint Antoine, Paris, France. · Department of Oncology, Institut Saint Catherine, Avignon, France. · Department of Oncology, Hôpital Layne Mont de Marsan, Mont de Marsan, France. · Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Hôpital Trousseau, Tours, France. · CHU La Timone, Marseille, France. · Department of Oncology, CHU Henri Mondor, Créteil, France. · Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, CHU Avicenne, Bobigny, France. · Department of Oncology, Institut de cancérologie de L'Ouest Paul Papin, Angers, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Paris, France. · Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, CHU Robert Debré, Reims, France. · GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie), Paris, France. · Department of Oncology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. ·Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol · Pubmed #28397697.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine has become a standard treatment regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, retrospective data suggest that gemcitabine might be inefficient in 50-60% of patients and thus not an optimum regimen in combination with nab-paclitaxel. We did a phase 2 trial to assess the activity and safety of a new regimen of nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil. METHODS: We did a non-comparative, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2 trial in 15 hospitals and institutions in France. Eligible participants were previously untreated patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (previous adjuvant chemotherapy after curative intent resection was allowed if the interval between the end of chemotherapy and relapse was more than 12 months). Patients had to have at least one measurable lesion assessed by CT scan or MRI and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or less. We randomly assigned participants (1:2) centrally to 28-day cycles of either gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil plus nab-paclitaxel. The randomisation was by minimisation, stratified by centre and ECOG performance status. Drugs were administered in each cycle as follows: nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m FINDINGS: Between Dec 12, 2013, and Oct 31, 2014, we randomly assigned 114 patients to treatment: 75 patients to the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and 39 to the gemcitabine group. One patient in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group did not have a 4-month assessment, and was thus excluded from the modified ITT analysis. Median follow-up was 13·1 months (95% CI 12·5-14·1). At 4 months, 40 (56%, 90% CI 45-66) of 72 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were alive and free from disease progression (21 [54%, 40-68] of 39 patients in the gemcitabine group were also alive and progression-free at 4 months). Grade 3-4 adverse events occurred in 33 (87%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group and in 56 (77%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group, with different toxicity profiles. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group were neutropenia without fever (17 [23%]), fatigue (16 [22%]), paraesthesia (14 [19%]), diarrhoea (nine [12%]), and mucositis (seven [10%]); in the gemcitabine group they were neutropenia without fever (12 [32%]), thrombocytopenia (seven [18%]), fatigue (eight [21%]), anaemia (five [13%]), increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase concentrations (five [13%] for both), and paraesthesia (four [11%]). Two participants died; one in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group from septic shock, and one in the gemcitabine group from diabetes compensation with acidosis; these deaths were deemed to be not related to treatment. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 28 (38%) of 73 patients in the leucovorin and fluorouracil group and in 14 (37%) of 38 in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: Nab-paclitaxel plus simplified leucovorin and fluorouracil fulfilled the primary endpoint in that more than the required 50% of our study population were progression-free at 4 months, with a tolerable toxicity profile. This regimen thus deserves further assessment in a phase 3 trial. FUNDING: GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) and Celgene through grants to GERCOR.

4 Clinical Trial Prognostic nomogram and score to predict overall survival in locally advanced untreated pancreatic cancer (PROLAP). 2016

Vernerey, Dewi / Huguet, Florence / Vienot, Angélique / Goldstein, David / Paget-Bailly, Sophie / Van Laethem, Jean-Luc / Glimelius, Bengt / Artru, Pascal / Moore, Malcolm J / André, Thierry / Mineur, Laurent / Chibaudel, Benoist / Benetkiewicz, Magdalena / Louvet, Christophe / Hammel, Pascal / Bonnetain, Franck. ·Methodological and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, EA 3181, University Hospital of Besançon, 3 Boulevard Alexandre Fleming, Besançon 25030, France. · Oncology Multidisciplinary Research Group (GERCOR), 151 rue du Faubourg Saint Antoine, Paris 75011, France. · Department of Radiotherapy, Tenon Hospital (AP-HP), 4 rue de la Chine, Paris 75020, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Besançon, 3 Boulevard Alexandre Fleming, Besançon 25030, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales hospital and Prince of Wales Clinical school, UNSW, Sydney, New South Wales 2031, Australia. · AGITG (Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group), 119-143 Missenden Rd, Camperdown, New South Wales 2050, Australia. · Department of Gastroenterology, Erasme University Hospital, Route de Lennik 808, Brussels 1070, Belgium. · Department of Radiology, Oncology and Radiation Science, University of Uppsala, Uppsala 75105, Sweden. · Department of Gastroenterology, Jean Mermoz Hospital, 55 avenue Mermoz, Lyon 69008, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Princess Margaret Hospital, 610 University Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M5G 2M9, Canada. · Department of Medical Oncology, Saint-Antoine Hospital (AP-HP), 184 rue du Faubourg Saint Antoine, Paris 75011, France. · Department of Radiotherapy and Medical Oncology, Sainte-Catherine Institute, 250 Chemin de Baigne Pieds, Avignon 84918, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Franco-British Hospital Institute, 3 Rue Barbès, Levallois-Perret 92300, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, 42 Boulevard Jourdan, Paris 75014, France. · Department of Digestive Oncology, Beaujon Hospital (AP-HP), 100 boulevard du General Leclerc, Clichy 92110, France. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #27404456.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The management of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) patients remains controversial. Better discrimination for overall survival (OS) at diagnosis is needed. We address this issue by developing and validating a prognostic nomogram and a score for OS in LAPC (PROLAP). METHODS: Analyses were derived from 442 LAPC patients enrolled in the LAP07 trial. The prognostic ability of 30 baseline parameters was evaluated using univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses. Performance assessment and internal validation of the final model were done with Harrell's C-index, calibration plot and bootstrap sample procedures. On the basis of the final model, a prognostic nomogram and a score were developed, and externally validated in 106 consecutive LAPC patients treated in Besançon Hospital, France. RESULTS: Age, pain, tumour size, albumin and CA 19-9 were independent prognostic factors for OS. The final model had good calibration, acceptable discrimination (C-index=0.60) and robust internal validity. The PROLAP score has the potential to delineate three different prognosis groups with median OS of 15.4, 11.7 and 8.5 months (log-rank P<0.0001). The score ability to discriminate OS was externally confirmed in 63 (59%) patients with complete clinical data derived from a data set of 106 consecutive LAPC patients; median OS of 18.3, 14.1 and 7.6 months for the three groups (log-rank P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The PROLAP nomogram and score can accurately predict OS before initiation of induction chemotherapy in LAPC-untreated patients. They may help to optimise clinical trials design and might offer the opportunity to define risk-adapted strategies for LAPC management in the future.

5 Clinical Trial Effect of Chemoradiotherapy vs Chemotherapy on Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Controlled After 4 Months of Gemcitabine With or Without Erlotinib: The LAP07 Randomized Clinical Trial. 2016

Hammel, Pascal / Huguet, Florence / van Laethem, Jean-Luc / Goldstein, David / Glimelius, Bengt / Artru, Pascal / Borbath, Ivan / Bouché, Olivier / Shannon, Jenny / André, Thierry / Mineur, Laurent / Chibaudel, Benoist / Bonnetain, Franck / Louvet, Christophe / Anonymous6180866. ·Department of Digestive Oncology, Beaujon Hospital (AP-HP), Clichy, France. · Department of Radiotherapy, Tenon Hospital (AP-HP), Paris, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, Erasme University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium. · Department of Medical Oncology, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia5Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG), Camperdown, Australia6Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. · Department of Radiology, Oncology, and Radiation Science, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden. · Department of Gastroenterology, Jean Mermoz Hospital, Lyon, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, Saint-Luc University Clinics, Brussels, Belgium. · Department of Gastroenterology, Robert Debré Hospital, Reims, France. · Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG), Camperdown, Australia6Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia11Department of Medical Oncology, Nepean Hospital NSW, Sydney, Australia. · Department of Medical Oncology, Saint-Antoine Hospital (AP-HP), Paris, France. · Department of Radiotherapy and Medical Oncology, Sainte-Catherine Institute, Avignon, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Franco-British Hospital Institute, Levallois-Perret, France15Oncology Multidisciplinary Research Group (GERCOR), Paris, France. · Department of Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology, Hospital Minjoz, Besançon, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. ·JAMA · Pubmed #27139057.

ABSTRACT: IMPORTANCE: In locally advanced pancreatic cancer, the role of chemoradiotherapy is controversial and the efficacy of erlotinib is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To assess whether chemoradiotherapy improves overall survival of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer controlled after 4 months of gemcitabine-based induction chemotherapy and to assess the effect of erlotinib on survival. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In LAP07, an international, open-label, phase 3 randomized trial, 449 patients were enrolled between 2008 and 2011. Follow-up ended in February 2013. INTERVENTIONS: In the first randomization, 223 patients received 1000 mg/m2 weekly of gemcitabine alone and 219 patients received 1000 mg/m2 of gemcitabine plus 100 mg/d of erlotinib. In the second randomization involving patients with progression-free disease after 4 months, 136 patients received 2 months of the same chemotherapy and 133 underwent chemoradiotherapy (54 Gy plus capecitabine). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was overall survival from the date of the first randomization. Secondary outcomes were the effect of erlotinib and quality assurance of radiotherapy on overall survival, progression-free survival of gemcitabine-erlotinib and erlotinib maintenance with gemcitabine alone at the second randomization, and toxic effects. RESULTS: A total of 442 of the 449 patients (232 men; median age, 63.3 years) enrolled underwent the first randomization. Of these, 269 underwent the second randomization. Interim analysis was performed when 221 patients died (109 in the chemoradiotherapy group and 112 in the chemotherapy group), reaching the early stopping boundaries for futility. With a median follow-up of 36.7 months, the median overall survival from the date of the first randomization was not significantly different between chemotherapy at 16.5 months (95% CI, 14.5-18.5 months) and chemoradiotherapy at 15.2 months (95% CI, 13.9-17.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 1.03; 95% CI, 0.79-1.34; P = .83). Median overall survival from the date of the first randomization for the 223 patients receiving gemcitabine was 13.6 months (95% CI, 12.3-15.3 months) and was 11.9 months (95% CI, 10.4-13.5 months) for the 219 patients receiving gemcitabine plus erlotinib (HR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.97-1.45; P = .09; 188 deaths vs 191 deaths). Chemoradiotherapy was associated with decreased local progression (32% vs 46%, P = .03) and no increase in grade 3 to 4 toxicity, except for nausea. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this open-label, randomized trial involving patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer with disease controlled after 4 months of induction chemotherapy, there was no significant difference in overall survival with chemoradiotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone and there was no significant difference in overall survival with gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine plus erlotinib used as maintenance therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00634725.

6 Clinical Trial Prognostic value of health-related quality of life in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a random forest methodology. 2016

Diouf, Momar / Filleron, Thomas / Pointet, Anne-Laure / Dupont-Gossard, Anne-Claire / Malka, David / Artru, Pascal / Gauthier, Mélanie / Lecomte, Thierry / Aparicio, Thomas / Thirot-Bidault, Anne / Lobry, Céline / Fein, Francine / Dubreuil, Olivier / Landi, Bruno / Zaanan, Aziz / Taieb, Julien / Bonnetain, Franck. ·Clinical Research and Innovation Directorate, Amiens University Hospital, Amiens, France. diouf.momar@chu-amiens.fr. · Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, EA 3181 CHU Besançon and the Qualité de Vie et Cancer Clinical Research Platform, Besançon, France. diouf.momar@chu-amiens.fr. · Biostatistics Unit, Claudius Régaud Institute, Toulouse, France. · Hepatogastroenterology and Digestive Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. · CHU Jean Minjoz, Besançon, France. · Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. · Hôpital Privé Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France. · Centre Georges-François Leclerc, Dijon, France. · CHU de Tours-Hôpital Trousseau, Chambray-Les-Tours, France. · CHU Avicenne, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Bobigny, France. · CHU Bicêtre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. · CHU Bichat-Claude Bernard, Paris, France. · Hepatogastroenterology and Digestive Oncology Department, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. julien.taieb@egp.aphp.fr. · Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, EA 3181 CHU Besançon and the Qualité de Vie et Cancer Clinical Research Platform, Besançon, France. ·Qual Life Res · Pubmed #26615615.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG-PS) is currently an important parameter in the choice of treatment strategy for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPA) patients. However, previous research has shown that patients' self-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scales provided additional prognostic information in homogeneous groups of patients with respect to ECOG-PS. The aim of this study was to identify HRQOL scales with independent prognostic value in mPA and to propose prognostic groups for these patients. METHODS: We analysed data from 98 chemotherapy-naive patients with histologically proven mPA recruited from 2007 to 2011 in the FIRGEM phase II study which aimed to compare the effectiveness of two chemotherapy regimen. HRQOL data were assessed with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. A random survival forest methodology was used to impute missing data and to identify major prognostic factors for overall survival. RESULTS: Baseline HRQOL assessment was completed by 60 % of patients (59/98). Twelve prognostic variables were identified. The three most important prognostic variables were fatigue, appetite loss, and role functioning, followed by three laboratory variables. The model's discriminative power assessed by Harrell's C statistic was 0.65. Fatigue score explained almost all the survival variability. CONCLUSION: HRQOL scores have prognostic value for mPA patients with good ECOG-PS. Moreover, the patient's fatigue, appetite loss, and self-perception of daily activities were more reliable prognostic indicators than clinical and laboratory variables. These HRQOL scores, especially the fatigue symptom, should be urgently included for prognostic assessment of mPA patients (with good ECOG-PS).

7 Clinical Trial A randomized phase II study of weekly nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine or simplified LV5FU2 as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: the AFUGEM GERCOR trial. 2015

Bachet, Jean-Baptiste / Chibaudel, Benoist / Bonnetain, Franck / Validire, Pierre / Hammel, Pascal / André, Thierry / Louvet, Christophe / Anonymous110845. ·Paris-Sorbonne University, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France. jean-baptiste.bachet@psl.aphp.fr. · Department of hepatogastroenterology, Groupe hospitalier Pitié Salpêtrière, Paris, France. jean-baptiste.bachet@psl.aphp.fr. · Department of oncology, Hôpital Saint Antoine, Paris, France. benoist.chibaudel@sat.aphp.fr. · Head of methodology and quality of life in oncology department, Hôpital Universitaire de Besancon, EA 3181, Besancon, France. franck.bonnetain@univ-fcomte.fr. · Department of pathology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. pierre.validire@imm.fr. · Department of digestive oncology, Hôpital Beaujon, Clichy, France. pascal.hammel@bjn.aphp.fr. · Paris-Sorbonne University, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France. thierry.andre@sat.aphp.fr. · Department of oncology, Hôpital Saint Antoine, Paris, France. thierry.andre@sat.aphp.fr. · Department of oncology, Institut Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France. christophe.louvet@imm.fr. ·BMC Cancer · Pubmed #26445094.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) prognosis remains dismal and gemcitabine monotherapy has been the standard treatment over the last decade. Currently, two first-line regimens are used in this setting: FOLFIRINOX and nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine. Increasing translational data on the predictive value of hENT1 for determining gemcitabine efficacy suggest that a non-gemcitabine-based regimen is favored in about 60 % of patients with PAC due to high resistance of PAC to this cytotoxic drug. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of weekly nab-paclitaxel combined with gemcitabine or a simplified (s) LV5FU2 regimen in patients with previously untreated metastatic PAC. METHODS/DESIGN: AFUGEM is a two-stage, open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase II trial. Patients with PAC who meet the inclusion criteria and provide written informed consent will be randomized in a 1:2 ratio to either nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2)) plus gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2)) given on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days or nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m(2)) plus sLV5FU2 (leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) followed by bolus 400 mg/m(2) 5-fluorouracil and by 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m(2) as an 46-h intravenous infusion) given on days 1 and 15 every 28 days. A total of 114 patients will be randomized to one of the treatment arms. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival at 4 months. Secondary outcomes are rate and duration of response, disease control, overall survival, safety, and quality of life. Potential biomarkers of gemcitabine (hENT1, dCK) and 5-fluorouracil (TS) efficacy will be assessed. DISCUSSION: The AFUGEM trial is designed to provide valuable information regarding efficacy and tolerability of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel plus sLV5FU2 regimens. Identification of potential predictive biomarkers of gemcitabine and 5-fluorouracil is likely to drive therapeutic decisions in patients with metastatic PAC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: AFUGEM is registered at Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01964534 , October 15, 2013.

8 Clinical Trial Sequential FOLFIRI.3 + Gemcitabine Improves Health-Related Quality of Life Deterioration-Free Survival of Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A Randomized Phase II Trial. 2015

Anota, Amélie / Mouillet, Guillaume / Trouilloud, Isabelle / Dupont-Gossart, Anne-Claire / Artru, Pascal / Lecomte, Thierry / Zaanan, Aziz / Gauthier, Mélanie / Fein, Francine / Dubreuil, Olivier / Paget-Bailly, Sophie / Taieb, Julien / Bonnetain, Franck. ·National Quality of Life in Oncology Platform, Besançon, France; Methodological and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit (EA 3181), University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Methodological and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit (EA 3181), University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, University of Paris Descartes, Paris, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Hepato-Gastro-Enterology and Digestive Oncology Department, Hospital Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, University Hospital of Tours- Trousseau Hospital, Chambray-Les-Tours, France. · Biostatistics and Quality of Life Unit, Centre Georges François Leclerc, Dijon, France. ·PLoS One · Pubmed #26010884.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: A randomized multicenter phase II trial was conducted to assess the sequential treatment strategy using FOLFIRI.3 and gemcitabine alternately (Arm 2) compared to gemcitabine alone (Arm 1) in patients with metastatic non pre-treated pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoint was the progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. It concludes that the sequential treatment strategy appears to be feasible and effective with a PFS rate of 43.5% in Arm 2 at 6 months (26.1% in Arm 1). This paper reports the results of the longitudinal analysis of the health-related quality of life (HRQoL) as a secondary endpoint of this study. METHODS: HRQoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline and every two months until the end of the study or death. HRQoL deterioration-free survival (QFS) was defined as the time from randomization to a first significant deterioration as compared to the baseline score with no further significant improvement, or death. A propensity score was estimated comparing characteristics of partial and complete responders. Analyses were repeated with inverse probability weighting method using the propensity score. Multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed to identify independent factors influencing QFS. RESULTS: 98 patients were included between 2007 and 2011. Adjusting on the propensity score, patients of Arm 2 presented a longer QFS of Global Health Status (Hazard Ratio: 0.52 [0.31-0.85]), emotional functioning (0.35 [0.21-0.59]) and pain (0.50 [0.31-0.81]) than those of Arm 1. CONCLUSION: Patients of Arm 2 presented a better HRQoL with a longer QFS than those of Arm 1. Moreover, the propensity score method allows to take into account the missing data depending on patients' characteristics. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Eudract N° 2006-005703-34. (Name of the Trial: FIRGEM).

9 Clinical Trial Fixed-dose rate gemcitabine alone or alternating with FOLFIRI.3 (irinotecan, leucovorin and fluorouracil) in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: an AGEO randomised phase II study (FIRGEM). 2014

Trouilloud, Isabelle / Dupont-Gossard, Anne-Claire / Malka, David / Artru, Pascal / Gauthier, Mélanie / Lecomte, Thierry / Aparicio, Thomas / Thirot-Bidault, Anne / Lobry, Céline / Asnacios, Amani / Manet-Lacombe, Sophie / Fein, Francine / Dubreuil, Olivier / Landi, Bruno / Zaanan, Aziz / Bonnetain, Franck / Taïeb, Julien. ·Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. · CHU Jean Minjoz, Besançon, France. · Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France. · Hôpital Privé Jean Mermoz, Lyon, France. · Centre Georges-François Leclerc, Dijon, France. · CHU de Tours-Hôpital Trousseau, Chambray-Les-Tours, France. · CHU Avicenne, Université Paris 13, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Bobigny, France. · CHU Bicêtre, Le Kremlin-Bicêtre, France. · CHU Bichat-Claude Bernard, Paris, France. · CHU Antoine Béclère, Clamart, France. · Centre Hospitalier René Dubos, Cergy-Pontoise, France. · Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Université Paris Descartes, Paris, France. Electronic address: julien.taieb@egp.aphp.fr. ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #25454414.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Fluorouracil and irinotecan-based, and gemcitabine-based regimens, are the standard of care in the first-line treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. New approaches are needed to improve survival and quality of life. Whether a sequential approach alternating irinotecan, fluorouracil and gemcitabine may be effective and tolerable in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer is unknown. METHODS: In this randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial, patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, World Health Organisation (WHO) performance status 0-1, and bilirubin levels <1.5 upper limit of normal values (ULN) were randomised 1:1 to receive as first-line treatment either FOLFIRI.3 (irinotecan, leucovorin and fluorouracil) alternating with fixed-dose rate gemcitabine as 2-month periods (FIRGEM, arm A), or fixed-dose rate gemcitabine alone (arm B). Treatment was continued until disease progression or limiting toxicity. The primary end-point was the crude progression-free survival (PFS) rate at 6 months. The study is registered with EudraCT (N° 2006-005703-34). RESULTS: Between October 2007 and March 2011, 98 patients were enroled. The observed 6-month PFS rate was 43.5% (95% confidence interval (CI), [28.6-58.4%]) in arm A reaching the Fleming decision rules criteria to reject H0 and 26.1% (95% CI [12.9-39.3%]) in arm B. Objective response rates were 37% (23-51%) in arm A and 10% (1-19%) in arm B. Median PFS (5.0 versus 3.4 months, hazard ratio (HR)=0.59 [0.38-0.90]) and overall survival (11.0 versus 8.2 months, HR=0.71 [0.46-1.10]) were higher in arm A compared to arm B. The most frequent grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (49%/24%; febrile neutropenia, 4%/0% in arms A/B), diarrhoea (arm A, 12% and arm B, 0%), and nausea/vomiting (8%/4%). No toxic deaths occurred. CONCLUSION: The FIRGEM strategy appears to be effective and feasible in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

10 Clinical Trial Phase II study of first-line FOLFIRI for progressive metastatic well-differentiated pancreatic endocrine carcinoma. 2011

Brixi-Benmansour, Hedia / Jouve, Jean-Louis / Mitry, Emmanuel / Bonnetain, Franck / Landi, Bruno / Hentic, Olivia / Bedenne, Laurent / Cadiot, Guillaume. ·Service d'Hépato-Gastroentérologie et d'Oncologie Digestive, CHU de Reims, Hôpital Robert-Debré, Reims F-51092 Cedex, France. ·Dig Liver Dis · Pubmed #21831734.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pancreatic endocrine carcinomas are rare and heterogeneous. Published results concerning treatment of advanced tumours are inconsistent and responses to standard chemotherapy remain unsatisfactory. AIM: To investigate the ability of the FOLFIRI regimen to manage progressive unresectable metastatic well-differentiated endocrine carcinomas of the pancreas as first-line chemotherapy. METHODS: 20 patients with metastatic or advanced well-differentiated endocrine carcinomas of the pancreas and progressive disease were enrolled in a prospective multicentre phase II trial to receive chemotherapy with FOLFIRI schedule (irinotecan 180mg/m(2) infusion combined with simplified LV5FU2) every 14 days. The primary end point was the non-progression rate at 6 months. RESULTS: The 6-month non-progression rate was 80% (95% confidence interval [56-94%]), with stabilisation in 15 patients and 1 objective response. Overall survival at 24 months was 65% [40-82%]. Median progression-free survival was 9.1 months [6.5-17.3 months]. The median number of administered cycles was 12 [range 1-28]. Grade 3/4 haematologic toxicity occurred in 5 patients (25%) and grade 3 digestive toxicity in 11. CONCLUSION: The FOLFIRI regimen, as first-line chemotherapy, achieved stabilisation in most patients whose tumours had been progressing and was well-tolerated. It could be an alternative therapy for advanced well-differentiated endocrine carcinomas of the pancreas.

11 Clinical Trial [Locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer: Induction chemoradiotherapy followed by maintenance gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone: Definitive results of the 2000-2001 FFCD/SFRO phase III trial]. 2011

Barhoumi, M / Mornex, F / Bonnetain, F / Rougier, P / Mariette, C / Bouché, O / Bosset, J-F / Aparicio, T / Mineur, L / Azzedine, A / Hammel, P / Butel, J / Stremsdoerfer, N / Maingon, P / Bedenne, L / Chauffert, B. ·EA, département de radiothérapie-oncologie, centre hospitalier Lyon-Sud, Pierre-Bénite, France. barhoumi.maha@yahoo.fr ·Cancer Radiother · Pubmed #21315644.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: To compare chemoradiation with systemic chemotherapy to chemotherapy alone in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and nineteen patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer, with World Health Organization performance status of zero to two were randomly assigned to either the induction chemoradiation group (60 Gy, 2 Gy/fraction; concomitant 5-fluoro-uracil infusion, 300 mg/m(2) per day, days 1-5 for 6 weeks; cisplatin, 20 mg/m(2) per day, days 1-5 during weeks 1 and 5) or the induction gemcitabine group (GEM: 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks). Maintenance gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly, 3/4 weeks) was given in both arms until disease progression or toxicity. RESULTS: Overall survival was shorter in the chemoradiation than in the gemcitabine arm (median survival 8.6 [99% confidence interval 7.1-11.4] and 13 months [8,9,9-18], p=0.03). One-year survival was, respectively, 32 and 53%. These results were confirmed in a per-protocol analysis for patients who received 75% or more of the planned dose of radiotherapy. More overall grades 3-4 toxic effects were recorded in the chemoradiation arm, both during induction (36 versus 22%) and maintenance (32 versus 18%). CONCLUSION: This intensive induction schedule of chemoradiation was more toxic and less effective than gemcitabine alone.

12 Clinical Trial Combination 5-fluorouracil, folinic acid and cisplatin (LV5FU2-CDDP) followed by gemcitabine or the reverse sequence in metastatic pancreatic cancer: final results of a randomised strategic phase III trial (FFCD 0301). 2010

Dahan, Laetitia / Bonnetain, Frank / Ychou, Marc / Mitry, Emmanuel / Gasmi, Mohamed / Raoul, Jean-Luc / Cattan, Stéphane / Phelip, Jean-Marc / Hammel, Pascal / Chauffert, Bruno / Michel, Pierre / Legoux, Jean-Louis / Rougier, Philippe / Bedenne, Laurent / Seitz, Jean-François / Anonymous790675. ·Service d'Oncologie Digestive, Pôle Oncologie-Spécialités, CHU Timone, Marseille cedex 5, France. laetitia.dahan@mail.ap-hm.fr ·Gut · Pubmed #20947887.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Gemcitabine is the standard chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Although the 5-fluorouracil (5FU), folinic acid and cisplatin combination (LV5FU2-CDDP) is an option, the optimal order of the regimens must be determined. The first strategic phase III trial comparing LV5FU2-CDDP followed by gemcitabine versus gemcitabine followed by LV5FU2-CDDP was conducted. METHODS: Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, performance status (PS) 0-2, without prior chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either LV5FU2-CDDP followed by gemcitabine at disease progression or toxicity (Arm A), or the opposite sequence (Arm B). 202 patients had to be included and 170 deaths had to be observed to detect an expected improvement in median overall survival (OS) from 6.5 to 10 months in Arm A (two-sided α = 5% and β = 20%). RESULTS: 202 patients were included (Arm A, 102; Arm B, 100). Median age, male/female ratio, PS 0-1 and previous surgery were similar in the two arms. After a median follow-up of 44 months, median OS in Arm A was 6.6 months versus 8.0 months in Arm B (p = 0.85). Median progression-free survival was similar between Arms A and B. More grade 3/4 toxicities were observed when LV5FU2-CDDP was administered as a first-line treatment compared with gemcitabine: 79% versus 64% (p = 0.018). CONCLUSION: This trial did not show any strategic advantage to using LV5FU2-CDDP as a first-line treatment and suggests that gemcitabine remains the standard first-line treatment. Sixty-one per cent of patients were able to receive a second line of chemotherapy.

13 Clinical Trial Phase III trial comparing intensive induction chemoradiotherapy (60 Gy, infusional 5-FU and intermittent cisplatin) followed by maintenance gemcitabine with gemcitabine alone for locally advanced unresectable pancreatic cancer. Definitive results of the 2000-01 FFCD/SFRO study. 2008

Chauffert, B / Mornex, F / Bonnetain, F / Rougier, P / Mariette, C / Bouché, O / Bosset, J F / Aparicio, T / Mineur, L / Azzedine, A / Hammel, P / Butel, J / Stremsdoerfer, N / Maingon, P / Bedenne, L. ·Department of Oncology, Anticancer Center G.F. Leclerc, Dijon, France. ·Ann Oncol · Pubmed #18467316.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The role of chemoradiation with systemic chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is uncertain. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred and nineteen patients with LAPC, World Health Organization performance status of zero to two were randomly assigned to either the induction CHRT group (60 Gy, 2 Gy/fraction; concomitant 5-fluorouracil infusion, 300 mg/m(2)/day, days 1-5 for 6 weeks; cisplatin, 20 mg/m(2)/day, days 1-5 during weeks 1 and 5) or the induction gemcitabine group (GEM: 1000 mg/m(2) weekly for 7 weeks). Maintenance gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly, 3/4 weeks) was given in both arms until disease progression or toxicity. RESULTS: Overall survival was shorter in the CHRT than in GEM arm [median survival 8.6 (99% confidence interval 7.1-11.4) and 13 months (8.7-18.1), P = 0.03]. One-year survival was, respectively, 32% and 53%. These results were confirmed in a per-protocol analysis for patients who received 75% or more of the planned dose of radiotherapy. More overall grades 3-4 toxic effects were recorded in the CHRT arm, both during induction (36 versus 22%) and maintenance (32 versus 18%). CONCLUSION: This intensive induction schedule of CHRT was more toxic and less effective than gemcitabine alone.

14 Article Overall Survival Prediction and Usefulness of Second-Line Chemotherapy in Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. 2017

Vienot, Angélique / Beinse, Guillaume / Louvet, Christophe / de Mestier, Louis / Meurisse, Aurélia / Fein, Francine / Heyd, Bruno / Cleau, Denis / d'Engremont, Christelle / Dupont-Gossart, Anne-Claire / Lakkis, Zaher / Tournigand, Christophe / Bouché, Olivier / Rousseau, Benoît / Neuzillet, Cindy / Bonnetain, Franck / Borg, Christophe / Vernerey, Dewi. ·Department of Gastroenterology, Methodological and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, EA 3181, Department of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, and Department of Medical Oncology, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France; Department of Medical Oncology, Henri Mondor University Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Paris Est Créteil University (UPEC), Créteil, France; Department of Medical Oncology, Institute Mutualiste Montsouris, Paris, France; Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology, Reims University Hospital, Reims, France; INSERM, Unit 1098, and Clinical Investigation Center 1431, University of Bourgogne-Franche-Comté, Besançon, France; Department of Gastroenterology, Vesoul Hospital, Vesoul, France. ·J Natl Cancer Inst · Pubmed #28383673.

ABSTRACT: Background: In advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (aPDAC), there is no consensual strategy for second-line chemotherapy (L2). Better discrimination of overall survival (OS) may help clinical decision-making. We aimed to predict OS from the beginning of L2 and to assess the benefit from chemotherapy among the identified risk groups. Methods: Analyses were derived from all consecutive aPDAC patients treated at Besancon University Hospital, Besancon, France, between January 2003 and December 2013 (n = 462). The association of 50 parameters with OS was evaluated using univariate and multivariable Cox analyses. Based on the final model, a prognostic nomogram and score were developed and externally validated. Patients in the external validation cohort who received L2 (n = 163) were treated at three French institutions between January 2010 and April 2016. All statistical tests were two-sided. Results: In the development cohort, 395 patients (85.5%) were eligible for L2, of which 261 (66.1%) were treated. Age, smoking status, liver metastases, performance status, pain, jaundice, ascites, duration of first-line, and type of L2 regimen were identified as independent prognostic factors for OS in L2. The score determined three groups with median OS of 11.3 months (95% confidence interval [CI] = 9.1 to 12.9 months), 3.6 months (95% CI = 2.6 to 4.7 months), and 1.4 months (95% CI = 1.2 to 1.7 months), for low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively ( P < .001). By applying the score in the population eligible for L2 but untreated, the chemotherapy benefit was statistically significant across all groups, but with a magnitude of the effect decreased statistically significantly from low- to high-risk groups ( P = .001 for treatment and risk groups interaction term). The ability of the score to discriminate OS was confirmed in the external validation cohort. Conclusions: This prognostic nomogram and score in patients with aPDAC can accurately predict OS before administration of L2 and may help clinicians in their therapeutic decisions.

15 Article Care pathway of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer in daily practice in France: Results from the REPERE national survey. 2017

Hammel, Pascal / Coriat, Romain / Lledo, Gérard / de Bausset, Mariella / Selosse, Marion / Obled, Stéphane / Bonnetain, Franck. ·Beaujon Hospital (AP-HP), 100, boulevard du Général-Leclerc, 92110 Clichy, France. Electronic address: pascal.hammel@aphp.fr. · Cochin Hospital (AP-HP), 27, rue du Faubourg-Saint-Jacques, 75014 Paris, France. · Jean-Mermoz Private Hospital, 55, avenue Jean-Mermoz, 69008 Lyon, France. · Foundation ARCAD, 151, rue du Faubourg-Saint Antoine, 75011 Paris, France. · University Regional Hospital (CHRU) of Nîmes, 30029, rue du Professeur-Robert-Debré, 30900 Nîmes, France. · Jean-Minjoz University Regional Hospital (CHRU), 3, boulevard Fleming, 25030 Besançon, France. ·Bull Cancer · Pubmed #28087054.

ABSTRACT: Data in the literature regarding the care pathway of pancreatic cancer patients are limited. The objective of the REPERE survey was to identify and describe the initial stages of the care pathway of pancreatic patients in the metastatic phase. From May to October 2015, 62 oncologists (ON) or gastroenterologists specialized in digestive oncology (GESDO) and 300 general practitioners (GP) completed an electronic questionnaire on the pathway of 728 patients recently diagnosed with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Of these patients, 200 completed a questionnaire given by a specialized physician (ON/GESDO). Weight loss (65%), fatigue (53%) or anorexia (49%) were the main signs/symptoms that motivated the patients to seek medical advice. For 87% of patients, the general practitioner was the first medicine doctor they consulted. According to the respondents (patient, general practitioner or specialist), the median delay between the onset of the first symptoms and the final diagnosis of pancreatic cancer was between 41 and 65 days. This time lapse tended to decrease with associated jaundice (-15 days on average, standard deviation=8, P<0.1 NS) or with patient concerns triggered by the first symptoms (-11 days on average, standard deviation=6, P<0.05). On the contrary, the time lapse was longer (+14 days on average, standard deviation=6, P<0.05) when the general practitioner prescribed symptomatic treatment. In conclusion, diagnostic management of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer should be accelerated with efforts to raise practitioners' awareness.

16 Article Additive value of pre-operative and one-month post-operative lymphocyte count for death-risk stratification in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: a multicentric study. 2016

d'Engremont, Christelle / Vernerey, Dewi / Pointet, Anne-Laure / Simone, Gaël / Fein, Francine / Heyd, Bruno / Koch, Stéphane / Vuitton, Lucine / Kim, Stefano / Jary, Marine / Lamfichek, Najib / Turco, Celia / Lakkis, Zaher / Berger, Anne / Bonnetain, Franck / Taieb, Julien / Bachellier, Philippe / Borg, Christophe. ·Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and GI oncology, Paris Descartes University, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France. · Department of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University hospital of Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France. · Department of Digestive Surgery and Liver Transplantation, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. · Department of Digestive Surgery, Hospital of Belfort-Montbeliard, Montbeliard, France. · Department of GI Surgery, Paris Descartes University, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Paris, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, University Hospital of Besançon, Besançon, France. christophe.borg@efs.sante.fr. · Centre investigation Clinique en biothérapie, CIC-1431, Besançon, France. christophe.borg@efs.sante.fr. · UMR1098 INSERM/Université de Franche Comté/Etablissement Français du Sang, Besançon, France. christophe.borg@efs.sante.fr. · Department of Oncology, University Hospital of Besançon, 3 Boulevard Alexander Fleming, Besancon, F-25030, France. christophe.borg@efs.sante.fr. ·BMC Cancer · Pubmed #27782813.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) incidence is increasing worldwide. Several studies have shown that lymphopenia was correlated with a poor prognosis but the potential interest to measure lymphopenia in the pre and post-operative setting as well as its added value among conventional prognostic factors was never investigated. METHODS: Data from two independent cohorts in whom patients underwent resection for pancreatic carcinoma were retrospectively recorded. We examined the association between perioperative findings, pre and post-operative lymphocyte counts and overall survival (OS) in univariate and multivariate analyses. Performance assessment and internal validation of the final model were evaluated with Harrell's C-index, calibration plot and bootstrap sample procedures. RESULTS: Three hundred ninety patients were included in the analysis between 2000 and 2011. Pre and post-operative lymphocyte counts were independent prognostic factors associated with OS in multivariate analysis (p = 0.0128 and p = 0.0764, respectively). The addition of lymphocyte count variable to the conventional parameters identified in multivariate analysis (metastatic lymph node ratio, veinous emboli and adjuvant chemotherapy) significantly improved the model discrimination capacity (bootstrap mean difference = 0.04; 95 % CI, 0.01-0.06). The use of a threshold and combining the categorical (≥1000; <1000) information in pre and post lymphocyte counts permitted the identification of 4 subgroups of patients with different prognosis (p < 0.0001). Finally, the description of patients in long-term remission showed that only 3 of 65 (4.6 %) patients with post-operative lymphocyte count under 1000/mm CONCLUSION: Pre and post-operative lymphopenia are independent prognostic factors for OS and they have an additive value regarding conventional prognostic factors for death-risk stratification and to predict long-term survival. Lymphopenia should be included as stratification factors in future clinical trial assessing overall survival in pancreatic cancer patients.

17 Article Applying the Longitudinal Model from Item Response Theory to Assess Health-Related Quality of Life in the PRODIGE 4/ACCORD 11 Randomized Trial. 2016

Barbieri, Antoine / Anota, Amélie / Conroy, Thierry / Gourgou-Bourgade, Sophie / Juzyna, Beata / Bonnetain, Franck / Lavergne, Christian / Bascoul-Mollevi, Caroline. ·Biometrics Unit-CTD INCa, Institut régional du Cancer Montpellier (ICM) - Val d'Aurelle, Montpellier, France (AB, SG-B, CB-M) · Institut Montpelliérain Alexander Grothendieck, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France (AB, CL) · National Quality of Life in Oncology Platform, France (AA, TC, FB) · Methodological and Quality of Life Unit in Oncology (EA 3181), Besançon, France (AA, FB) · Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Nancy, France (TC) · Unicancer R&D, Paris, France (BJ) · Université Paul-Valéry Montpellier 3, Montpellier, France (CL) ·Med Decis Making · Pubmed #26683246.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION: A new longitudinal statistical approach was compared to the classical methods currently used to analyze health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) data. The comparison was made using data in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. METHODS: Three hundred forty-two patients from the PRODIGE4/ACCORD 11 study were randomly assigned to FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine regimens. HRQoL was evaluated using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30. The classical analysis uses a linear mixed model (LMM), considering an HRQoL score as a good representation of the true value of the HRQoL, following EORTC recommendations. In contrast, built on the item response theory (IRT), our approach considered HRQoL as a latent variable directly estimated from the raw data. For polytomous items, we extended the partial credit model to a longitudinal analysis (longitudinal partial credit model [LPCM]), thereby modeling the latent trait as a function of time and other covariates. RESULTS: Both models gave the same conclusions on 11 of 15 HRQoL dimensions. HRQoL evolution was similar between the 2 treatment arms, except for the symptoms of pain. Indeed, regarding the LPCM, pain perception was significantly less important in the FOLFIRINOX arm than in the gemcitabine arm. For most of the scales, HRQoL changes over time, and no difference was found between treatments in terms of HRQoL. DISCUSSION: The use of LMM to study the HRQoL score does not seem appropriate. It is an easy-to-use model, but the basic statistical assumptions do not check. Our IRT model may be more complex but shows the same qualities and gives similar results. It has the additional advantage of being more precise and suitable because of its direct use of raw data.

18 Article Rationale and design of the Adapted Physical Activity in advanced Pancreatic Cancer patients (APACaP) GERCOR (Groupe Coopérateur Multidisciplinaire en Oncologie) trial: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. 2015

Neuzillet, Cindy / Vergnault, Mathieu / Bonnetain, Franck / Hammel, Pascal. ·Digestive Oncology Department and UMR1149, Beaujon University Hospital, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris Nord Val de Seine (HUPNVS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), 92110, Clichy La Garenne, France. cindy.neuzillet@orange.fr. · Visio Activités Sportives Interactives (V@si SARL), 34270, Saint Mathieu de Tréviers, France. mathieu.vergnault@vas-i.fr. · Methodology and Quality of Life in Oncology unit (EA 3181) and Quality of Life and Cancer Clinical Research Platform, Besançon University Hospital, 25000, Besançon, France. franck.bonnetain@univ-fcomte.fr. · Digestive Oncology Department and UMR1149, Beaujon University Hospital, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris Nord Val de Seine (HUPNVS), Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), 92110, Clichy La Garenne, France. pascal.hammel@bjn.aphp.fr. ·Trials · Pubmed #26458923.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Exercise during chemotherapy is a promising strategy to reduce fatigue and improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL). It has been shown to be feasible and efficient in various cancers, including advanced-stage cancers. Effects of physical activity have never been explored in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We aim to evaluate the effects of an exercise intervention in this setting. METHODS: This randomized, national, multicenter, interventional study will examine the effectiveness of an unsupervised, home-based, 16-week adapted physical activity (APA) program. Specificities of advanced PDAC for the implementation of the APA program will be taken into account (healthy volunteer as physical activity partner instead of patient groups, nutritional management). The main inclusion criteria are: patients with histologically confirmed, unresectable PDAC; scheduled for chemotherapy; performance status 0-2; age ≥ 18; and physical activity partner. In total, 200 patients will be randomized into either the APA program (aerobic and resistance exercises) in addition to usual care (including chemotherapy at the investigator's choice), or usual care. The primary objective will be the effect on fatigue (Multidimensional Fatigue Inventory, MFI-20) and HRQoL (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Quality of Life-C30 questionnaire, EORTC-QLQ-C30; co-primary endpoint) at week 16. As secondary objectives, the effects of the exercise intervention on pain, anxiety, depression, nutritional status, insulin resistance, tolerance of chemotherapy, survival, and adherence to the APA program will be evaluated. DISCUSSION: Patients with advanced PDAC are strongly affected by fatigue, and are thus likely to benefit from an exercise intervention. Moreover, exercise may have a potential beneficial effect on tumor outcome by reducing insulin resistance and insulin/insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) secretion. However, an exercise intervention may appear challenging due to multiple PDAC-related symptoms such as fatigue, depression, pain, and denutrition. We hypothesize that an APA program taking into account specific characteristics of PDAC may improve symptoms and HRQoL. If demonstrated to be feasible and effective, such APA programs will be systematically proposed to patients with advanced PDAC in addition to usual care. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrial.gov REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02184663 ; Registration date: 2 July 2014.

19 Article Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after Folfirinox failure: an AGEO prospective multicentre cohort. 2015

Portal, Alix / Pernot, Simon / Tougeron, David / Arbaud, Claire / Bidault, Anne Thirot / de la Fouchardière, Christelle / Hammel, Pascal / Lecomte, Thierry / Dréanic, Johann / Coriat, Romain / Bachet, Jean-Baptiste / Dubreuil, Olivier / Marthey, Lysiane / Dahan, Laetitia / Tchoundjeu, Belinda / Locher, Christophe / Lepère, Céline / Bonnetain, Franck / Taieb, Julien. ·Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris Descartes University, Paris, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, Poitiers University Hospital, Poitiers, France. · Methodological and Quality of Life Unit in Oncology, Quality of Life and Cancer Clinical Research Platform, Besançon University Hospital, Besançon, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, Kremlin Bicêtre Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris Sud University, Le Kremlin Bicêtre, France. · Department of Medical Oncology, Anticancer Center Leon Berard, Lyon I university, Lyon, France. · Department of Digestive Oncology, Hospital Beaujon, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris Denis Diderot University, Clichy, France. · Department of Hepato-Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, University Hospital of Tours, UMR CNRS 7192, François-Rabelais University, Tours, France. · Gastroenterology and Endoscopy Unit, Cochin Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris Descartes University, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Paris, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, La Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Sorbonne University, UPMC University Paris 06, Paris, France. · Department of Hepatogastroenterology and Nutrition, Antoine-Béclère Hospital, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), DHU Hepatinov, Clamart, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital La Timone, Aix-Marseille University, Marseille, France. · Department of Gastroenterology and Digestive Oncology, Orleans Regional Hospital (CHRO), Orleans, France. · Department of Gastroenterology, Meaux Hospital, Meaux, France. ·Br J Cancer · Pubmed #26372701.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: There is currently no standard second-line treatment for metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (MPA), and progression-free survival is consistently <4 months in this setting. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine (A+G) after Folfirinox failure in MPA. METHODS: From February 2013 to July 2014, all consecutive patients treated with A+G for histologically proven MPA after Folfirinox failure were prospectively enrolled in 12 French centres. A+G was delivered as described in the MPACT trial, until disease progression, patient refusal or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were treated with Nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine, for a median of 4 cycles (range 1-12). The disease control rate was 58%, with a 17.5% objective response rate. Median overall survival (OS) was 8.8 months (95% CI: 6.2-9.7) and median progression-free survival was 5.1 months (95% CI: 3.2-6.2). Since the start of first-line chemotherapy, median OS was 18 months (95% CI: 16-21). No toxic deaths occurred. Grade 3-4 toxicities were reported in 40% of patients, consisting of neutropenia (12.5%), neurotoxicity (12.5%), asthenia (9%) and thrombocytopenia (6.5%). CONCLUSIONS: A+G seems to be effective, with a manageable toxicity profile, after Folfirinox failure in patients with MPA.

20 Article Time to health-related quality of life score deterioration as a modality of longitudinal analysis for health-related quality of life studies in oncology: do we need RECIST for quality of life to achieve standardization? 2015

Anota, Amélie / Hamidou, Zeinab / Paget-Bailly, Sophie / Chibaudel, Benoist / Bascoul-Mollevi, Caroline / Auquier, Pascal / Westeel, Virginie / Fiteni, Frederic / Borg, Christophe / Bonnetain, Franck. ·Quality of Life in Oncology Clinical Research Platform, Besançon, France, aanota@chu-besancon.fr. ·Qual Life Res · Pubmed #24277234.

ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: Longitudinal analysis of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) remains unstandardized and compromises comparison of results between trials. In oncology, despite available statistical approaches, results are poorly used to change standards of care, mainly due to lack of standardization and the ability to propose clinical meaningful results. In this context, the time to deterioration (TTD) has been proposed as a modality of longitudinal HRQoL analysis for cancer patients. As for tumor response and progression, we propose to develop RECIST criteria for HRQoL. METHODS: Several definitions of TTD are investigated in this paper. We applied this approach in early breast cancer and metastatic pancreatic cancer with a 5-point minimal clinically important difference. In breast cancer, TTD was defined as compared to the baseline score or to the best previous score. In pancreatic cancer (arm 1: gemcitabine with FOLFIRI.3, arm 2: gemcitabine alone), the time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) was investigated with or without death as event. RESULTS: In the breast cancer study, 381 women were included. The median TTD was influenced by the choice of the reference score. In pancreatic cancer study, 98 patients were enrolled. Patients in Arm 1 presented longer TUDD than those in Arm 2 for most of HRQoL scores. Results of TUDD were slightly different according to the definition of deterioration applied. CONCLUSION: Currently, the international ARCAD group supports the idea of developing RECIST for HRQoL in pancreatic and colorectal cancer with liver metastasis, with a view to using HRQoL as a co-primary endpoint along with a tumor parameter.

21 Article S100A2 is a predictive biomarker of adjuvant therapy benefit in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. 2013

Bachet, Jean-Baptiste / Maréchal, Raphael / Demetter, Pieter / Bonnetain, Franck / Cros, Jérôme / Svrcek, Magali / Bardier-Dupas, Armelle / Hammel, Pascal / Sauvanet, Alain / Louvet, Christophe / Paye, François / Vaillant, Jean-Christophe / André, Thierry / Closset, Jean / Salmon, Isabelle / Emile, Jean-François / Van Laethem, Jean-Luc. ·Medical University Pierre et Marie Curie, UFR Paris VI, 91-105 Boulevard de l'Hôpital, Paris, France. jean-baptiste.bachet@psl.aphp.fr ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #23726265.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Prognosis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) remains poor. S100A2 has been recently suggested as a negative prognostic biomarker in PAC. We aimed to investigate its prognostic and/or predictive value in a large independent multicentric cohort of patients with resected PAC. METHODS: Sequential samples of 471 patients were retrospectively collected; 142 patients did not receive adjuvant treatment (30%) and 329 (70%) received an adjuvant treatment. We measured protein levels of S100A2 by semiquantitative immunohistochemistry with tissue microarrays and correlated with patients' overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). RESULTS: S100A2 protein status was obtained in 462 (98%) patients. Its expression was low, moderate or high in 59%, 12% and 2% of cases, respectively. It was not correlated with DFS or OS in the whole population, neither in the subgroup of patients who did not receive adjuvant treatment. However among patients who received an adjuvant therapy, moderate/high levels of S100A2 were significantly associated with longer OS and DFS in multivariate analysis (hazard ratios of 0.63, p=0.022 and 0.67, p=0.017, respectively), whereas low S100A2 was not. Interaction tests for adjuvant therapy were statistically significant both for the OS and the DFS (p=0.001 and p=0.023, respectively). On multivariate analysis, S100A2 retained independent predictive values (OS: p<0.001, DFS: p=0.003) with a significant benefit of adjuvant therapy for those patients with moderate/high S100A2. CONCLUSIONS: S100A2 expression predicts longer DFS and OS in patients treated with adjuvant therapy and should be evaluated as a predictive biomarker.

22 Article FOLFIRI regimen in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma resistant to gemcitabine and platinum-salts. 2012

Neuzillet, Cindy / Hentic, Olivia / Rousseau, Benoît / Rebours, Vinciane / Bengrine-Lefèvre, Léïla / Bonnetain, Franck / Lévy, Philippe / Raymond, Eric / Ruszniewski, Philippe / Louvet, Christophe / Hammel, Pascal. ·Service de Gastroentérologie-Pancréatologie, Hôpital Beaujon, 100 Boulevard du Général Leclerc, 92110 Clichy La Garenne, AP-HP, France. ·World J Gastroenterol · Pubmed #22969226.

ABSTRACT: AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the FOLFIRI regimen in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PAC) after the failure of gemcitabine and platinum salts. METHODS: All consecutive patients with histologically confirmed, metastatic PAC and World Health Organization performance status (PS) ≤ 2 received FOLFIRI-1 [irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) on day 1 and leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) followed by 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) 400 mg/m(2) bolus, then 5-FU 2400 mg/m(2) as a 46-h infusion, biweekly] or FOLFIRI-3 (irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and leucovorin 400 mg/m(2), then 5-FU 2400 mg/m(2) as a 46-h infusion and irinotecan 100 mg/m(2) repeated on day 3, biweekly) after failure of gemcitabine and platinum-based chemotherapies as a systematic policy in two institutions between January 2005 and May 2010. Tumor response, time to progression (TTP), overall survival rate (OS) and grade 3-4 toxicities were retrospectively studied. Subgroup analyses were performed to search for prognostic factors. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients (52.4% male, median age 59 years) were analyzed. Among them, 42.9% were PS 0, 38.1% were PS 1 and 19.0% were PS 2. Fifty one patients (81.0%) had liver metastases. Before the FOLFIRI regimen, patients had received 1 line (n = 19), 2 lines (n = 39) or 3 lines (n = 5) of chemotherapy. Median TTP obtained with the line before FOLFIRI was 3.9 mo (95% CI: 3.4-5.3 mo). A total of 480 cycles was completed (median: 6 cycles, range: 1-51 cycles). The main reason for discontinuing FOLFIRI was tumor progression (90.3%). Tumor control was achieved in 25 patients (39.7%) (partial response: n = 5, stable disease: n = 20) with FOLFIRI. Median TTP was 3.0 mo (95% CI: 2.1-3.9 mo) and median OS was 6.6 mo (95% CI: 5.3-8.1 mo). Dose adaptation was required in 36 patients (57.1%). Fifteen patients (23.8%) had grade 3-4 toxicities, mainly hematological (n = 11) or digestive (n = 4). Febrile neutropenia occurred in 3 patients. There was no toxic death. PS 2 was significantly associated with poor TTP [hazard ratio (HR): 16.036, P < 0.0001] and OS (HR: 4.003, P = 0.004). CONCLUSION: The FOLFIRI regimen had an acceptable toxicity and an interesting efficacy in our study, limited to patients in good condition (PS 0-1).

23 Article Contribution of CXCR4 and SMAD4 in predicting disease progression pattern and benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma. 2012

Bachet, J B / Maréchal, R / Demetter, P / Bonnetain, F / Couvelard, A / Svrcek, M / Bardier-Dupas, A / Hammel, P / Sauvanet, A / Louvet, C / Paye, F / Rougier, P / Penna, C / Vaillant, J C / André, T / Closset, J / Salmon, I / Emile, J F / Van Laethem, J L. ·Medical University Pierre et Marie Curie, UFR Paris VI, Paris. jean-baptiste.bachet@psl.aphp.fr ·Ann Oncol · Pubmed #22377565.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Prognosis of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma is poor. Many prognostic biomarkers have been tested, but most studies included heterogeneous patients. We aimed to investigate the prognostic and/or predictive values of four relevant biomarkers in a multicentric cohort of patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 471 patients who had resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma were included. Using tissue microarray, we assessed the relationship of biomarker expressions with the overall survival: Smad4, type II TGF-β receptor, CXCR4, and LKB1. RESULTS: High CXCR4 expression was found to be the only independent negative prognostic biomarker [hazard ratio (HR) = 1.74; P < 0.0001]. In addition, it was significantly associated with a distant relapse pattern (HR = 2.19; P < 0.0001) and was the strongest prognostic factor compared with clinicopathological factors. In patients who did not received adjuvant treatment, there was a trend toward decrease in the overall survival for negative Smad4 expression. Loss of Smad4 expression was not correlated with recurrence pattern but was shown to be predictive for adjuvant chemotherapy (CT) benefit (HR = 0.59; P = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: CXCR4 is a strong independent prognostic biomarker associated with distant metastatic recurrence and appears as an attractive target to be evaluated in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Negative SMAD4 expression should be considered as a potential predictor of adjuvant CT benefit.

24 Article Time until definitive quality of life score deterioration as a means of longitudinal analysis for treatment trials in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. 2010

Bonnetain, Franck / Dahan, Laetitia / Maillard, Emilie / Ychou, Marc / Mitry, Emmanuel / Hammel, Pascal / Legoux, Jean-Louis / Rougier, Philippe / Bedenne, Laurent / Seitz, Jean-François. ·Biostatistic and Epidemiological Unit (EA 4184) and Clinical Research Platform Qualité de vie et Cancer, Centre Georges François Leclerc Cancer Care Center, Dijon, France. fbonnetain@cgfl.fr ·Eur J Cancer · Pubmed #20724140.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: The Fédération Francophone de Cancérologie Digestive phase III trial in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma comparing 5FU, folinic acid and cisplatin combination followed by gemcitabine (Arm A) versus the opposite sequence (Arm B) failed to demonstrate a benefit in overall survival. To longitudinally compare the quality of life (QoL) we explored different definitions of time until definitive deterioration (TUDD) of QoL scores according to minimal clinically important difference (MCID) cut-offs. METHODS: QoL was evaluated using the EORTC QLQ-C30 every 8 weeks until death. The following scores were analysed: global health, emotional functioning, physical functioning, fatigue and pain. TUDD was defined as the time interval between randomisation and the first occurrence of a decrease in QLQ-C30 score ≥5 points without any further improvement in QoL score ≥5 points or any further available QoL data. Analyses were repeated using a 10 point MCID and/or including death as event. RESULTS: From 08/2003 to 05/2006, 102 patients in Arm A and 100 in Arm B were included. Using a 5 and a 10 point MCID, TUDD curves of the 5 scores did not differ according to treatment arm., The median TUDD of global health was 5.2 months (4.3-6.2) in Arm A and 6.1 months (5.1-8.5) in Arm B (log-rank p=0.50) including death as an event for a 5 point MCID. Multivariate Cox model showed that tumour localisation and progression were independently associated with TUDD (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The strategy of chemotherapy did not influence the deterioration of QoL. The TUDD approach seems to provide meaningful clinical results that are adapted to metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma trials.