CHEMOTHERAPY

Regimul FOLFIRINOX în tratamentul adjuvant şi metastatic al cancerului pancreatic în era oncologiei de precizie

 FOLFIRINOX in adjuvant and metastatic settings for pancreatic cancer in the era of precision oncology

First published: 24 martie 2021

Editorial Group: MEDICHUB MEDIA

DOI: 10.26416/OnHe.5.1.2021.4574

Abstract

Pancreatic cancer remains an aggressive disease with an unfavorable prognosis, although progress has been made in recent years. Thirty-five percent of patients with pancreatic cancer have locally advanced unresectable disease at diagnosis. Several studies have examined the systemic chemotherapy with FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin and fluorouracil plus irinotecan and oxaliplatin) in patients with advanced local pancreatic cancer. FOLFIRINOX is now considered a standard first-line treatment because it has shown improved overall and progression-free survival in comparison with gemcitabine, proved by Conroy et al. in the ACOORD11-trial, associated with an increased toxicity profile. Currently, there are no validated biomarkers, efforts being made to identify molecular factors or biomarkers that predict the response to therapy in order to maximize the treatment efficacy and avoid unnecessary toxic effects for patients who do not respond to this combination of chemotherapy. New data indicate that molecular types of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma identified from immunohistochemistry (KRT81 and HNF1A) may predict the response to FOLFIRINOX or to gemcitabine-based regimen. Also, machine learning analysis of medical imaging has proven the ability to predict the response to one of the two chemotherapy regimens. Currently, FOLFIRINOX and Gem/nab-P are approved for the first line in locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer, with a benefit regarding overall survival for FOLFIRINOX and a better toxicity profile for Gem/nab-P. PRODIGE 24-ACCORD demonstrates the superiority of a modified-attenuated FOLFIRINOX regimen (mFOLFIRINOX) in adjuvant settings versus gemcitabine chemotherapy. It is expected that mFOLFIRINOX may be a candidate for neoadjuvant treatment in locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Even though multiple molecular targets have been identified and the modulation of the tumor microenvironment is tried to improve the immunotherapy results, currently FOLFIRINOX regimen is the cornerstone of systemic therapy in pancreatic cancer.
 

Keywords
pancreatic cancer, chemotherapy, FOLFIRINOX, immunotherapy

Rezumat

Cancerul pancreatic rămâne o boală agresivă, cu un prognostic nefavorabil, deşi s-au făcut progrese în ultimii ani în ceea ce pri­veş­te diagnosticul şi terapia. 35% dintre pacienţii cu can­cer pancreatic prezintă boală nerezecabilă avansată local la diag­nos­tic. Mai multe studii au examinat chimioterapia sis­te­mi­că cu FOLFIRINOX (leucovorină şi fluorouracil plus iri­no­tecan şi oxa­li­pla­tină) la pacienţii cu cancer pancreatic lo­cal avansat. Regimul de po­li­chi­mio­te­ra­pie FOLFIRINOX este acum considerat standardul te­ra­peu­tic de primă linie, de­oa­re­ce a de­mon­strat o supravieţuire ge­ne­ra­lă îmbunătăţită şi prelungirea intervalului liber de boală în comparaţie cu chimioterapia cu gemcitabină ca agent unic, aşa cum au de­­mon­­strat Conroy şi colaboratorii în stu­diul ACOORD11, re­gi­mul FOLFIRINOX fiind asociat totuşi cu un profil de to­xi­ci­ta­te crescut. În prezent, nu există biomarkeri va­li­daţi pentru răs­­pun­­sul la regimul FOLFIRINOX, depunându-se eforturi pen­tru identificarea subtipurilor mo­le­cu­lare cu valoare de biomarker care pot prezice răspunsul la chimioterapie, pen­­tru a maximiza eficacitatea tratamentului şi a evita efec­te­le toxice asociate acestuia. Noi date indică faptul că ti­pu­ri­le moleculare de adenocarcinom ductal pancreatic iden­ti­fi­ca­te din imunohistochimie (KRT81 şi HNF1A) pot pre­zi­ce răspunsul la chimioterapia cu regimul FOLFIRINOX sau la gemcitabină. De asemenea, analiza imagistică prin al­go­ritmi machine-learning este evaluată pentru a prezice răs­pun­sul la unul dintre cele două regimuri de chimioterapie. În prezent, FOLFIRINOX şi asocierea gemcitabină/nab-pa­cli­taxel sunt aprobate în prima linie în te­ra­pia cancerului pan­crea­tic local avansat/metastatic, cu un be­ne­ficiu privind su­pra­vie­ţui­rea generală pentru FOLFIRINOX şi cu un profil de toxicitate mai bun pentru gemcitabină/nab-paclitaxel. PRODIGE 24-ACCORD demonstrează superioritatea unui regim FOLFIRINOX mo­di­ficat-atenuat („mFOLFIRINOX”) în adjuvanţă faţă de mono­chi­mio­terapia cu gemcitabină. Se estimează că re­gi­mul mFOLFIRINOX va fi şi un candidat pentru tratamentul neo­ad­ju­­vant în cancerul pancreatic avansat local. Chiar dacă au fost iden­ti­fi­ca­te mai multe ţinte moleculare şi în prezent se studiază mo­du­la­rea micromediului tumoral pentru a îmbunătăţi re­zul­ta­te­le imunoterapiei, în prezent regimul FOLFIRINOX rămâne un standard terapeutic în tratamentul sistemic al cancerului pan­creatic.
 

Introduction

Pancreatic cancer remains one of the most lethal diseases, with a tendency to reach in the next decade one of the leading causes of cancer mortality in Western countries. The five-year survival is approximately 8%, with more than half of patients being diagnosed in stage IV. Until the introduction of gemcitabine in 1997, 5-fluorouracil was the therapeutic standard, the median survival being about 4.4 months, increasing by about 1.3 months after gemcitabine was introduced as a therapeutic standard alone.

FOLFIRINOX – past, present and future perspectives

An association of chemotherapies (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan and oxaliplatin), the FOLFIRINOX regimen demonstrated in a phase II trial a survival benefit, reaching 10.2 months, with an improvement in the quality of life, but with an increased hematological toxicity (grade 3 and 4 neutropenia) in more than 50% of cases. The toxicity profile appears to differ significantly depending on the treated population. The study by Okusaka et al. reported, on a Japanese population, a rate higher than 75% for grade 3 and 4 neutropenia, and almost 89% of the patients needed to reduce or delay the dose administration of FOLFIRINOX. This study led to the first-line approach of FOLFIRINOX in Japan in 2013 for unresectable pancreatic cancer. Two years before, the PRODIGE 4/ACCORD 11 trial, which enrolled 342 patients from France with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0 or 1, was the basis for the approval of the FOLFIRINOX regimen for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer with good performance status(1).

A study that analyzed the tolerance and efficacy of the dose-adjusted FOLFIRINOX regimen in elderly patients diagnosed with colorectal or pancreatic cancer demonstrated the feasibility and safety of this regimen, if the adjustment of irinotecan (dose according to the UGT1A1 polymorphism) is associated with 5-fluorouracil (dose according to the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase pharmacodynamics). The correlation between irinotecan toxicity and heterozygous UGT1A1 polymorphisms was also demonstrated by Shirasu et al. In patients treated with the initial FOLFIRINOX regimen, the level of toxicity is lower than in patients with wild-type UGT1A1. A study that evaluated the possibility of using the FOLFIRINOX regimen concluded that, for patients over 70 years of age, a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen could be used due to the absence of bolus and to irinotecan dose reduction, the multivariate analysis demonstrating that the geriatric risk factors do not affect the survival(2,3).

In the adjuvant treatment, fluorouracil-based chemotherapy has become the standard treatment, following the publication of data from a 15-year trial that revealed a survival benefit for patients receiving adjuvant fluorouracil chemotherapy(4).

The trial that modified the FOLFIRINOX regimen (oxaliplatin 85 mg per square meter of body-surface area, irinotecan 150 mg per square meter, leucovorin 400 mg per square meter, and fluorouracil 2400 mg per square meter), every two weeks, was compared with the baseline regimen based on gemcitabine 1000 mg/square meter on days 1, 8 and 15, every four weeks, for 24 weeks(5).

Surgery remains the basic treatment of unresectable pancreatic cancer. Even though an R0 resection is possible, the recurrence rate is close to 80%. Numerous studies have tried to establish the optimal therapeutic behavior: radiotherapy, chemotherapy or the combination have been evaluated in adjuvant settings. The first study conducted by the North American Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group has shown the superiority of chemotherapy. The Euro­pean Study Group of Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC) has finally shown a benefit in survival for adjuvant chemotherapy but not for chemotherapy, the patients who received 20 Gy and 5FU presenting a detriment in survival. Subsequently, the patients receiving protocols based on mytomycin C and doxorubicin demonstrated insignificant survival benefits. The ESPAC-3 trial, that included 1088 patients, demonstrated an advantage for chemotherapy (23.6 months versus 23 months) regarding survival for gemcitabine, but an improvement in the safety profile compared to 5FU/folinic acid, confirming the gemcitabine-based chemotherapy standard treatment. These results confirm the data obtained in the CONKO-001 trial which demonstrated a net benefit for gemcitabine versus observation regarding DFS and OS (20.2 months versus 22.8 months). The ESPAC-4 trial demonstrated a benefit of 2.5 months for the combination of oral fluoropyrimidines, but also increased toxicity. The maximum benefit was found for R1 resections, with OS rates of 54.4 months in the group receiving mFOLFIRINOX in favor of the gemcitabine-treated group for which OS was 35 months. In the FOLFIRINOX-treated group, the grade III and IV adverse effects were 75.9%, while in the gemcitabine-treated group, only 29% were reported. Thus, the mFOLFIRINOX protocol becomes a therapeutic standard in the adjuvant treatment of pancreatic cancer(6-8).

In the case of pancreatic cancer, the authors have analyzed the possibility of de-escalating the FOLFIRINOX protocol to FOLFOX regimen, for cases with low treatment tolerance or non-progression disease. The maintenance with 5FU/leucovorin was used after 6 cycles and FOLFIRINOX will be restarted at the time of a disease progression. The authors consider the method feasible in reducing toxicities by ensuring a prolonged progression-free survival (PFS)(9).

In 2011, Conroy et al. demonstrated that a triple combination regimen, including leucovorin, oxaliplatin, irinotecan and fluorouracil, improved both overall survival and the quality of life, compared to the gemcitabine-based regimen, with an OS of 11.1 months versus 6.8 months for patients treated with gemcitabine. An improvement of life quality was also noticed; however, this regimen was associated with increased toxicities (neutropenia, diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy). The association of gemcitabine with nab-paclitaxel was also approved in the first-line treatment of pancreatic cancer, even though the OS and PFS data are lower, with 2.6 months for OS and 3.3 months for PFS, than those for the FOLFIRINOX regimen(1,10).

The nab-paclitaxel-gemcitabine regimen has an advantage in terms of toxicity profile compared to the FOLFIRINOX regimen proposed by Conroy in 2011. The high toxicity of the FOLFIRINOX profile made it necessary to evaluate the therapeutic protocols with an improved toxicity profile, but with efficacy and tolerance similar to the initial regimen, as Cavanna et al. reported using a chemotherapy scheme with -20% bolus 5-FU and -25% irinotecan(11,12).

Even though the combination therapy with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil and leucovorine (FOLFIRINOX) has been shown to bring a significant survival benefit for patients with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer, the efficacy of the FOLFIRINOX regimen after the failure of a gemcitabine treatment line was poorly investigated. A phase II study with a single prospective arm evaluated the feasibility and safety of the attenuated FOLFIRINOX regimen in this situation. The study included patients with ECOG performance status 0 and 1. The protocol included oxaliplatin 65 mg/m2, irinotecan 135 mg/m2 and leucovorine 400 mg/m2 injected intravenously on day 1 and 5-fluorouracil 2000 mg/m2 continuously intravenously infused over 46 hours on days 1 and 2, repeated after two weeks. The disease control was obtained in 64.1% of cases, the rates of OS at six months and one year were 59% and 15.4% respectively, and OS was 8.5 months (between 5.6 and 11.4 months). The most common grade 3 or 4 toxicity was neutropenia (41%), and the authors concluded that attenuated FOLFIRINOX regimen is a feasible alternative for patients refractory to gemcitabine treatment(13).

The identification of predictive biomarkers of response to FOLFIRINOX treatment has become a topical issue, with the increasing use of this toxic regimen in the neoadjuvant treatment of borderline resectable cancers. Although there are four studies that attempted to identify biomarkers of treatment response, no biomarker has been identified and validated up to the present. Numerous studies including liquid biopsy are investigating this topic which is becoming more and more important in the context of the need to identify those groups of patients who benefit from an aggressive regim(14).

The FOLFIRINOX protocol is also evaluated in a multicenter phase III trial (IDEA) that includes patients with R0 resected colon cancer with curative intent of a pT4N1 or pT1-4N2 colon adenocarcinoma. The study randomized patients into two arms receiving 12 cycles of modified FOLFOX6 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, 5-FU bolus 400 mg/m2, then 2.4 g/m2 over 46 hours) at two weeks during 24 weeks or modified FOLFOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorine 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2 and 5-FU 2.4 g/m2 over 46 hours) as adjuvant treatment. The results of the study will be available after 5 years of follow-up, expecting an advantage of about 10% in DFS, but also a benefit in OS(15,16).

The concept of induction and re-induction was used in the OPTIMOX 1 trial on colorectal cancers, on one of the arms using maintenance with 5FU/leucovorin after six cycles of FOLFOX protocol chemotherapy and oxaliplatin being reintroduced to progression. The European Study Group of Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC) has shown a benefit in survival for adjuvant chemotherapy but not for radiochemotherapy. The patients who have received radiotherapy in a total dose of 20 Gy and 5FU-based chemotherapy presented a detriment in survival. Subsequently, the patients’ protocols based on mitomycin C and doxorubicin demonstrated insignificant survival benefits(17).

Perri and colleagues comparatively analyzed the therapeutic response and survival of pancreatic cancer patients for the first-line chemotherapy based on gemcitabine, the FOLFIRINOX protocol or nab-paclitaxel. Evaluating the objective response according to RECIST imaging criteria, serum level variation of CA 19-9 antigen and OS, the authors did not identify major differences in OS if FOLFIRINOX or nab-paclitaxel was administered. The response rate according to the RECIST criteria and the rate of pancreatectomies were higher in the group treated with the FOLFIRINOX regimen. However, there were differences in the heterogeneity of the study group, that included 485 patients, the FOLFIRINOX regimen being more frequently administered in patients with a more favorable ECOG performance status, and nab-paclitaxel being administered more frequently in patients with more invasive tumors. A controversial topic remains the value of adjuvant chemotherapy up to three months after pancreatectomy in patients who have received neoadjuvant chemotherapy with the FOLFIRINOX protocol. Analyzing a group of 520 patients, of which 66% received adjuvant chemotherapy in the FOLFIRINOX protocol and the rest chemotherapy based on gemcitabine, capecitabine, therapeutic combinations or other agents, Roessel et al. identified an adjuvant benefit for OS only if there was evidence for pathological node positive disease, but the rate of neoadjuvant response, R0 resections and the duration of each sequence were not taken into account and should be evaluated in the future clinical trials. However, the systematic review and network meta-analysis of Parmar demonstrates a net benefit for mFOLFIRINOX in adjuvant OS, with no evidence of a benefit of chemotherapy based on gemcitabine, S1, nab-paclitaxel or if a combination is used, including erlotinib. New strategies have also been tested in addressing metastatic pancreatic cancer. The combination of chemotherapy with irinotecan, oxaliplatin and S-1, an oral prodrug of 5FU, has demonstrated safety and efficacy in terms of toxicity and OS profile(18-21).

The stratification into molecular subgroups, with therapeutic consequences for pancreatic cancer cases, led to the idea of analyzing the response to different FOLFIRINOX, depending on the molecular subtypes, the most relevant being considered, in terms of therapeutic implication, the KRT81 quasi-mesenchymal (QM)/squamous/basal-like and HNF1A non-QM, overlap with exocrine/ADEX subtype. In the group of patients in which the response to chemotherapy was evaluated, the authors of the study noted a lack of survival difference between the double-negative subtype and the HNF1A-positive subtype, the positive KRT81 being associated with a poor prognosis of the patient. KRT81-positive did not benefit from FOLFIRINOX therapy, and in HNF1A-positive, FOLFIRINOX group was superior in response to gemcitabine(22).

Recently, the results of the POLO trial revealed a significant benefit in PFS for the use of PARP inhibitors in maintenance after at least 16 weeks without progression for patients receiving platinum-based chemotherapy. The OS benefit remains modest. The trial included only patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer with the BRACA 1 and BRCA 2 mutations, present in less than 10% of the patients treated for pancreatic cancer(23).

Starting from the idea that most cases of pancreatic cases overexpress EGFR pathway, the use of molecules that block this pathway has been investigated in clinical trials. The results of using erlotinib and cetuximab were controversial or had minor benefits for a subgroup in the study population(24).

Immunotherapy is currently being evaluated in clinical trials as a single treatment or in combination. The results obtained so far are disappointing. PD-L1 and CTLA4 inhibitors demonstrated inefficiency alone. Among the theories that explain this, the most feasible is related to poor tumor immunogenicity, due to the small number of mutations (approximately 45), but also to the tumoral immunosuppressive microenvironment containing cancer-associated fibroblasts. The validation of some biomarkers of the response to immunotherapy and the identification of the possibility of increasing the immunogenicity of the cancerous tumor cell will be the basis of a future clinical application of immunotherapy for pancreatic cancer(25).

Erkan et al. identifies tumor hypothesis as a factor associated with invasive pancreatic cancer phenotype, also being correlated with resistance to adjuvant chemotherapy treatment. Hypoxia was also correlated with early metastasis. Thus, the therapeutic strategies that focus on reducing tumor hypoxia are part of the future directions in the treatment of pancreatic cancer(26).

Conclusions

Eight years after its introduction into clinical practice, the FOLFIRINOX protocol remains the basis of the first-line treatment of locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer, proving its efficacy in the non-adjuvant and adjuvant setting in this pathology. Although the therapeutic spectrum of pancreatic cancer will be improved by identifying biomarkers and new therapeutic targets, FOLFIRINOX remains the most efficient treatment for pancreatic cancer patients with ECOG performance status of 0 or 1, proving, from the perspective of new data from the clinical studies, a therapeutic potential in colorectal cancer. In the context of the disappointing results of targeted therapy and immunotherapy alone, future strategies will focus on associating these therapeutic methods with chemotherapy, also identifying biomarkers to stratify the treatment. The use of FOLFIRINOX in modified regimens or an attenuated toxicity in sequential association with immunotherapy, EGFR and PARP inhibitors, and the use in clinical trials of other therapeutic targets are options that may be explored in the future. FOLFIRINOX regimen remains the cornerstone of systemic treatment for one of the deadliest types of cancer.   

 

Conflicts of interests: The authors declare no conflict of interests.

Bibliografie

  1. Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M. FOLFIRINOX versus Gemcitabine for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364:1817-1825.
  2. Shirasu H, Todaka A, Omae K, et al. Impact of UGT1A1 genetic polymorphism on toxicity in unresectable pancreatic cancer patients undergoing FOLFIRINOX. Cancer Sci. 2019 Feb;110(2):707-716. 
  3. Lambert A, Gavoille C, Conroy T. Current status on the place of FOLFIRINOX in metastatic pancreatic cancer and future directions. Therap Adv Gastroenterol. 2017 Aug;10(8):631–645.
  4. Neoptolemos JP, Stocken DD, Friess H. A randomized trial of chemoradiotherapy and chemotherapy after resection of pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004 Mar 18;350(12):1200-10.
  5. Conroy T, Hammel P, Hebbar M, et al. Canadian Cancer Trials Group and the Unicancer-GI–PRODIGE Group. FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine as Adjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018 Dec 20;379(25):2395-2406. 
  6. Evans DB, Hess KR, Pisters PW. ESPAC-1 trial of adjuvant therapy for resectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg. 2002 Nov;236(5):694; author reply 694-6.
  7. Sultana A, Cox T, Ghaneh P, et al. Adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2012;196:65-88.
  8. Fenocchio E, Filippi R, Lombardi P. Is There a Standard Adjuvant Therapy for Resected Pancreatic Cancer? Cancers (Basel). 2019 Oct 12;11(10). pii:E1547. 
  9. Karasek P, Nemec J, Bednarik O, Petruzelka L, Melichar B, Bustova I, Spurny V, Krakorova D, Skacel T. Treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer with gemcitabine as a single agent: A multicentre trial. Ann Oncol. 2000;11:66.
  10. Min YJ, Joo KR, Park NH, Yun TK, Nah YW, Nam CW, Park JH. Gemcitabine Therapy in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. Korean J Intern Med. 2002 Dec;17(4):259–262.
  11. Blomstrand H, Scheibling U, Bratthäll C. Real world evidence on gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel combination chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic cancer. BMC Cancer. 2019 Jan 8;19(1):40.
  12. Cavanna L, Stroppa EM, Citterio C. Modified FOLFIRINOX for unresectable locally advanced/metastatic pancreatic cancer. A real-world comparison of an attenuated with a full dose in a single center experience. Onco Targets Ther. 2019 Apr 23;12:3077-3085.
  13. Kim JH, Lee SC, Oh SY, et al. Attenuated FOLFIRINOX in the salvage treatment of gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase II study. Cancer Commun (Lond). 2018 Jun 4;38(1):32.
  14. El Hassouni B, Li Petri G, Liu DSK, et al. Pharmacogenetics of treatments for pancreatic cancer. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2019 Jun;15(6):437-447.
  15. Bennouna J, André T, Campion L, et al. Rationale and Design of the IROCAS Study: Multicenter, International, Randomized Phase 3 Trial Comparing Adjuvant Modified (m) FOLFIRINOX to mFOLFOX6 in Patients With High-Risk Stage III (pT4 and/or N2) Colon Cancer-A UNICANCER GI-PRODIGE Trial. Clin Colorectal Cancer. 2019 Mar;18(1):e69-e73.
  16. Holch J, Stintzing S, Heinemanna V. Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Standard of Care and Future Perspectives. Visc Med. 2016 Jun;32(3):178–183.
  17. Hann A, Bohle W, Egger J, et al. Feasibility of alternating induction and maintenance chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Sci Rep. 2017;7:41549. 
  18. Perri G, Prakash L, Qiao W, et al. Response and survival associated with first-line FOLFIRINOX vs. Gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy for localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. JAMA Surg. 2020 Sep 1;155(9):832-839.
  19. Turpin A, El Amrani M, Bachet JB, Pietrasz D, Schwarz L, Hammel P. Adjuvant Pancreatic Cancer Management: Towards New Perspectives in 2021. Cancers (Basel). 2020 Dec 21;12(12):3866.
  20. Parmar A, Chaves-Porras J, Saluja R, Perry K, Rahmadian AP, Santos SD, Ko YJ, Berry S, Doherty M, Chan KKW. Adjuvant treatment for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2020 Jan;145:102817.
  21. Nie K, Zhang L, You Y, et al. Irinotecan combined with oxaliplatin and S-1 in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a single-arm, three-centre, prospective study. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2020;12:1758835920970843.
  22. Muckenhuber A, Berger AK, Schlitter AM, et al. Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Subtyping Using the Biomarkers Hepatocyte Nuclear Factor-1A and Cytokeratin-81 Correlates with Outcome and Treatment Response. Clin Cancer Res. 2018 Jan 15;24(2):351-359.
  23. Golan T, Hammel P, Reni M, Van Cutsem E. Maintenance Olaparib for Germline BRCA-Mutated Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019 Jul 25;381(4):317-327.
  24. Erkan M, Kurtoglu M, Kleeff J. The role of hypoxia in pancreatic cancer: a potential therapeutic target? Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016;10(3):301-16. 
  25. Amanam I, Chung V. Targeted Therapies for Pancreatic Cancer. Cancers (Basel). 2018 Feb;10(2):36.
  26. Andersson R, Pereira CF, Bauden M, et al. Is immunotherapy the holy grail for pancreatic cancer? Immunotherapy. 2019 Dec;11(17):1435-1438. 

Articole din ediţiile anterioare

REVIEW | Ediţia 2 43 / 2018

Asocierea dintre inhibitorii de tirozin-kinază şi chimioterapie în cancerul pulmonar fără celule mici

Alexandru C. Grigorescu

Această recenzie încearcă să analizeze câteva studii şi meta­analize ale inhibitorilor de tirozin-kinază (TKI) în combinaţie cu chimioterapia. Une ...

16 mai 2018
SHORT REVIEW | Ediţia 4 53 / 2020

Mai există un rol pentru nefrectomia citoreducţională în era terapiilor ţintite şi a imunoterapiei?

Edvina Elena Pîrvu, Irina Niţă, Ştefania Andreea Toma

Renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the most frequent type of kidney cancer, responsible for 5% of oncological diagnosis in men and for 3% in women, repres...

23 decembrie 2020
REVIEW | Ediţia 1 38 / 2017

Cancerul pancreatic

Alexandru C. Grigorescu

Cancerul pancreatic este pe locul al doisprezecelea ca incidenţă în lume. Acest cancer are o mortalitate ridicată, iar supravieţuirea globală este ...

04 aprilie 2017
REVIEW | Ediţia 1 42 / 2018

Sindromul secreţiei inadecvate de hormon antidiuretic (sindromul Schwartz-Bartter)

Beatrice Bulai , Anda Cojocariu

Sindroamele paraneoplazice reprezintă un capitol foarte im­por­tant în practica oncologiei medicale, iar recunoaşterea acestora îi poate releva med...

03 aprilie 2018