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
1452 - RBP-Jκ in colon cancer cells facilitates tumor associated macrophages (TAMs)-induced cell metastasis by secreting CXCL11
Presenter: Meng jie Liu
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
2786 - Development of a living organoid biobank derived from colorectal cancer patients: towards personalized medicine
Presenter: Federica Papaccio
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
3351 - Microsatellite Instability Detection in Colorectal Cancer: 44-Center Comparison between the Idylla MSI Assay and Routine Molecular and Immunohistochemistry Tests on Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissue
Presenter: Xavier Matias-guiu
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
4901 - Expression profile of EPHB3 and its prognostic significance in colorectal cancer progression (Running head: Prognostic value of EPHB3 in colorectal cancers)
Presenter: Bogun Jang
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5030 - A pan-ErbB family inhibitor, AF8c, promotes apoptosis by DR5/Nrf2 activation via ROS in colorectal cancer cells
Presenter: Soyeon Jeong
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5053 - Frequent BRAF, GNAS and SMAD4 mutations identified in Colorectal Mucinous Carcinomas
Presenter: Sun Mi Lee
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5220 - Impact of CCL4 knockout using CRISPR Cas-9 technology on colorectal tumor progression
Presenter: Roba Barakat
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5330 - Independent clinical validation of a gene expression profile to predict benefit of 5-FU in metastatic colorectal cancer
Presenter: Ida Buhl
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5515 - WRN mutated Colorectal Cancer (CRC) is characterized by a distinct molecular and immunological profile
Presenter: Andreas Seeber
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract
5716 - Mutation analysis of B2M gene in colorectal cancer patients with microsatellite instability
Presenter: Ivana Kašubová
Session: Poster Display session 2
Resources:
Abstract