Abstract 1169
Background
Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) represents more than one third of pancreatic cancers and owns poor survival after the standard chemotherapy. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel method and has been recently used in LAPC. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of IRE combined with chemotherapy and chemotheraoy alone for patients with LAPC.
Methods
Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) represents more than one third of pancreatic cancers and owns poor survival after the standard chemotherapy. Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a novel method and has been recently used in LAPC. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of IRE combined with chemotherapy and chemotheraoy alone for patients with LAPC.
Results
Before PSM analysis, patients with LAPC had better overall survival (OS), cancer-specific survival (CSS) and progression-free survival (PFS) after IRE combined with chemotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone (median OS, 16.0 months vs 8.0 months in SEER dataset, P < 0.001, 21.6 months vs 7.1 months in SYSUCC dataset, P = 0.006; median CSS, 18 months vs 8 months, P < 0.001; median PFS, 7.7 months vs 4.9 months, P = 0.001). Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that IRE combined with chemotherapy was identified as a significant prognostic factor for OS, CSS and PFS in LAPC patients of both the whole cohort and the matched cohort.Table: 703P
Univariate and multivariate analyses of OS in patients
Characteristic | Before PSM | After PSM | |||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | ||||||||||
HR | 95%CI | P | HR | 95%CI | P | HR | 95%CI | P | HR | 95% CI | P | ||
SEER dataset | |||||||||||||
Age (years) | ≤ 60 / > 60 | 1.295 | 1.193-1.406 | <0.001 | 1.281 | 1.180-1.391 | <0.001 | 1.304 | 1.186-1.435 | <0.001 | 1.283 | 1.166-1.412 | <0.001 |
Gender | Female / Male | 0.999 | 0.928-1.075 | 0.984 | NI | 0.994 | 0.914-1.082 | 0.895 | NI | ||||
Race | Black / White / Others | 0.949 | 0.876-1.027 | 0.194 | NI | 0.937 | 0.855-1.026 | 0.159 | |||||
Tumor size (cm) | ≤ 2 / 2∼4 / >4 | 1.137 | 1.066-1.213 | <0.001 | 1.148 | 1.075-1.225 | <0.001 | 1.135 | 1.054-1.222 | 0.001 | 1.138 | 1.056-1.226 | 0.001 |
Tumor grade | Well / Moderate / Poor | 1.115 | 1.048-1.186 | 0.001 | 1.077 | 1.012-1.147 | 0.019 | 1.119 | 1.043-1.200 | 0.002 | 1.081 | 1.007-1.160 | 0.032 |
LN metastasis | Absent / Present | 1.076 | 0.996-1.162 | 0.064 | NI | 1.072 | 0.981-1.172 | 0.123 | NI | ||||
Tumor site | Head / Body / Tail | 0.956 | 0.909-1.006 | 0.082 | NI | 0.960 | 0.960-1.016 | 0.157 | NI | ||||
Radiotherapy | No / Yes | 0.640 | 0.592-0.691 | <0.001 | 0.610 | 0.565-0.660 | <0.001 | 0.630 | 0.572-0.694 | <0.001 | 0.608 | 0.552-0.671 | <0.001 |
Chemotherapy | Without IRE / With IRE | 0.428 | 0.351-0.522 | <0.001 | 0.369 | 0.302-0.451 | <0.001 | 0.403 | 0.329-0.492 | <0.001 | 0.370 | 0.302-0.453 | <0.001 |
SYSUCC dataset | |||||||||||||
Age (years) | ≤ 60 / > 60 | 1.154 | 0.600-2.222 | 0.668 | NI | 0.889 | 0.351-0.253 | 0.804 | NI | ||||
Gender | Female / Male | 2.399 | 1.077-5.343 | 0.052 | NI | 4.630 | 1.317-16.275 | 0.017 | 4.975 | 1.081-22.891 | 0.039 | ||
Tumor size (cm) | ≤ 2 / 2∼4 / >4 | 1.657 | 0.843-3.257 | 0.143 | NI | 2.863 | 1.021-8.033 | 0.046 | 2.012 | 0.764-5.294 | 0.157 | ||
Tumor grade | Well / Moderate / Poor | 1.182 | 0.669-2.086 | 0.565 | NI | 1.797 | 0.680-3.293 | 0.316 | NI | ||||
LN metastasis | Absent / Present | 7.966 | 3.285-19.315 | <0.001 | 4.091 | 1.484-11.278 | 0.006 | 7.264 | 2.220-23.775 | 0.001 | 4.799 | 1.173-19.625 | 0.029 |
Tumor site | Head / Body / Tail | 1.317 | 0.879-1.973 | 0.182 | NI | 1.310 | 0.700-2.452 | 0.398 | NI | ||||
WBC (*109) | ≤ 10 / > 10 | 1.058 | 0.371-3.019 | 0.916 | NI | 0.463 | 0.061-3.527 | 0.457 | NI | ||||
HGB (g/L) | ≤ 120 / > 120 | 0.852 | 0.419-1.733 | 0.659 | NI | 1.401 | 0.461-4.264 | 0.552 | NI | ||||
PLT (*109) | ≤ 300 / > 300 | 0.513 | 0.181-1.455 | 0.209 | NI | 0.484 | 0.110-2.126 | 0.337 | NI | ||||
ALT (U/L) | ≤ 40 / > 40 | 0.929 | 0.435-1.981 | 0.848 | NI | 1.034 | 0.365-2.929 | 0.950 | NI | ||||
AST (U/L) | ≤ 40 / > 40 | 1.006 | 0.417-2.428 | 0.989 | NI | 0.623 | 0.143-2.719 | 0.529 | NI | ||||
ALP (U/L) | ≤ 100 / > 100 | 1.686 | 0.867-3.277 | 0.124 | NI | 1.395 | 0.549-3.546 | 0.484 | NI | ||||
GGT (U/L) | ≤ 45 / > 45 | 1.646 | 0.840-3.224 | 0.146 | NI | 2.106 | 0.821-5.400 | 0.121 | NI | ||||
ALB (g/L) | ≤ 40 / > 40 | 0.261 | 0.133-0.515 | 0.101 | NI | 0.437 | 0.153-1.244 | 0.121 | NI | ||||
TBIL (umol/L) | ≤ 20.5 / > 20.5 | 0.712 | 0.296-1.715 | 0.449 | NI | 0.360 | 0.083-1.569 | 0.174 | NI | ||||
IBIL (umol/L) | ≤ 15 / > 15 | 0.354 | 0.048-2.589 | 0.306 | NI | 0.043 | 0.001-77.525 | 0.411 | NI | ||||
CRP (ng/L) | ≤ 3 / > 3 | 3.312 | 1.582-6.936 | 0.001 | 1.741 | 0.757-4.005 | 0.192 | 3.094 | 1.136-8.428 | 0.127 | NI | ||
CEA (ng/mL) | ≤ 5 / > 5 | 1.029 | 0.527-2.011 | 0.933 | NI | 1.264 | 0.495-3.232 | 0.624 | NI | ||||
CA19-9 (U/ml) | ≤ 35 / > 35 | 1.745 | 0.676-4.507 | 0.250 | NI | 1.714 | 0.494-5.951 | 0.396 | NI | ||||
HBsAg | Negative/Positive | 0.220 | 0.030-1.610 | 0.136 | NI | 0.264 | 0.094-0.738 | 0.011 | NI | ||||
Chemotherapy | Without IRE/ With IRE | 0.206 | 0.082-0.515 | 0.001 | 0.363 | 0.132-0.998 | 0.050 | 0.264 | 0.094-0.738 | 0.011 | 0.313 | 0.098-0.992 | 0.048 |
Cheotherapy type | FOLFIRINOX/Gem | 0.910 | 0.648-1.277 | 0.584 | NI | 0.852 | 0.513-1.414 | 0.535 | NI |
Conclusions
IRE combined with chemotherapy is superior to chemotherapy alone in terms of OS, CSS and PFS for patients with LAPC. This combination method may be a more suitable way of treatment for patients with LAPC.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
The National Natural Science Funds (No. 81672390) and the National Key Research and Development Plan (No.2017YFC0910002).
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
3266 - Morphology of tumor-associated macrophages dictates the prognosis of patients with colorectal liver metastases.
Presenter: Matteo Donadon
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
1694 - Pembrolizumab (pembro) Plus mFOLFOX or FOLFIRI in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): KEYNOTE-651 Cohorts B and D
Presenter: Richard Kim
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
908 - Romidepsin (FK228) Regulates the Expression of the Immune Checkpoint Ligand PD-L1 and Exerts Synergistic Anti-Tumor Activity with an Anti-PD-1 Antibody in Colon Cancer
Presenter: Hui Li
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3127 - Prognostic significance of circulating regulatory T lymphocytes (Tregs) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) under treatment with first line chemotherapy.
Presenter: Zafeiris Zafeiriou
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5416 - The SAFFO study: Sex-related prognostic role And cut-oFf deFinition of monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio (MLR) in metastatic colOrectal cancer
Presenter: Camilla Lisanti
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2518 - SPICE, a phase I study of enadenotucirev in combination with nivolumab in tumors of epithelial origin: analysis of the metastatic colorectal cancer patients in the dose escalation phase
Presenter: Marwan Fakih
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4000 - Phase 1/2 study with CXCL12 inhibitor NOX-A12 and pembrolizumab in patients with microsatellite-stable, metastatic colorectal or pancreatic cancer
Presenter: Niels Halama
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2223 - Microsatellite Instability Status in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer and Effect of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors on Survival in MSI-High Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Presenter: Wataru Okamoto
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2569 - Phase II trial of Trametinib (T) and Panitumumab (Pmab) in RAS/RAF wild type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)
Presenter: Kanan Alshammari
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5402 - Microsatellite instability and immunogenicity in colorectal cancer – do resident memory Tcells (Trm) play a role in colorectal cancer
Presenter: Wei Toh
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract