Immunotherapeutic and oncolytic viral therapeutic strategies in pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive disease with dismal outcomes despite recent advances using combination chemotherapeutic regimens. The lack of an adequate immune response to malignant cells has been identified as a factor associated with tumor aggressiveness and refractoriness to systemic treatment. Preclinical and early clinical studies have identified numerous immunotherapeutic and oncolytic viral therapeutic strategies aimed towards amplifying the immune reaction to pancreatic cancer and have established encouraging results. Promising antitumor efficacy has been observed both in vitro and in vivo with many of these approaches. These novel applications have also led to improved understanding of the process of pancreatic tumor growth and invasion, knowledge of the tumor microenvironment and have pioneered further investigations of similar therapies. Here we review both immunotherapeutic and oncolytic viral therapeutic strategies in pancreatic cancer.

Activity of 129 single-agent drugs in 228 phase I and II clinical trials in multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: More than 400 preclinical studies report ≥ 1 compound as cytotoxic to multiple myeloma (MM) cells; however, few of these agents became relevant in the clinic. Thus, the utility of such assays in predicting future clinical value is debatable. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We examined the application of early-phase trial experiences to predict future clinical adoption. We identified 129 drugs explored as single agents in 228 trials involving 7421 patients between 1961 and 2013. RESULTS: All drugs in common use in MM (melphalan, dexamethasone, prednisone, cyclophosphamide, bendamustine, thalidomide, lenalidomide, pomalidomide, bortezomib, carfilzomib, and doxorubicin) demonstrated a best reported response rate of ≥ 22%. Older agents, including teniposide, fotemustine, paclitaxel, and interferon, also appear active by this criterion; however, if mean response rates from all reported trials for an agent are considered, then only drugs with a mean response rate of 15% partial response are in clinical use. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that thresholds of 20% for best or 15% for mean response are highly predictive of future clinical success. Below these thresholds, no drug has yet reached regulatory approval or widespread use in the clinic. Thus, this benchmark provides 1 element of the framework for guiding choice of drugs for late-stage clinical testing.

A comparison of lenalidomide/dexamethasone versus cyclophosphamide/lenalidomide/dexamethasone versus cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Novel agents are considered standard components of induction therapy for newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. We retrospectively compared the results of three consecutive phase 2 clinical trials; RD (lenalidomide/dexamethasone, n=34), CRD (cyclophosphamide/lenalidomide/dexamethasone, n=53) and CyBorD (cyclophosphamide/bortezomib/dexamethasone, n=63) (N=150). Response rates after four cycles of treatment were: ≥near complete response (nCR), 12% vs. 2% vs. 41%, P<0·0001 and very good partial response or better, 35% vs. 30% vs. 65%, P=0·0003, respectively. With all cycles of therapy considered, ≥nCR was 35%, 15% and 41%, P=0·006. However, there is no evidence that one regimen produced superior progression-free survival (PFS) (median: 3·2 vs. 2·3 vs. 2·7years, P=0·11) or overall survival (3-year: 88% vs. 79% vs. 88%, P=0·23). Transplantation did not impact PFS (median: 2·7 vs. 2·3 years, P=0·41) but was associated with improved OS (3-year: 93% vs. 75%, P≤0·001). High genetic risk patients (n=40) had earlier relapse despite lenalidomide or bortezomib (median: 2·1 vs. 2·7years, P=0·45). Grade 3/4 toxicities were least with CyBorD while CRD had most toxicity. In conclusion, CyBorD demonstrated superior responses and less frequent serious toxicity but more neuropathy when compared to RD and CRD. Importantly, 80% of patients treated with modern therapeutic approaches are alive at 4years.

Carfilzomib: a novel second-generation proteasome inhibitor.

Carfilzomib (formerly PR-171) is a novel epoxyketone-based irreversible proteasome inhibitor. In preclinical studies, carfilzomib demonstrated irreversible binding to the proteasome and minimal off-target inhibition of other proteases. In clinical studies carfilzomib has demonstrated substantial antitumor activity in hematologic malignancies while exhibiting a well-tolerated side-effect profile. Painful neuropathy was minimally reported, suggesting a possible advantage over other proteasome inhibitors. With single-agent carfilzomib, dose-limiting toxicity was hematologic and included thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. In patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma, twice-weekly consecutive-day single-agent carfilzomib 20 mg/m(2) for 3 weeks every 28 days, escalating to 27 mg/m(2) the second cycle was associated with a 54% overall response rate in bortezomib-naive patients and a 26% overall response rate in bortezomib and immunomodulatory drug refractory patients.

Treatment with bortezomib of a patient having hyper IgG4 disease.

Hyper IgG4 disease is a recently described inflammatory disease characterized by lymphoplasmacytic infiltration leading to fibrosis and tissue destruction. Whereas most cases have been successfully treated with corticosteroids, recurrent or refractory cases may benefit from alternative therapies. Bortezomib has proven to be successful in the treatment of multiple myeloma, and its mechanism indicates that it may have merit in autoimmune or other plasmacytic disorders. We report a patient with recurrent pulmonary infiltration with IgG4 plasma cells, consistent with hyper IgG4 disease, who was successfully treated using a bortezomib-based combination with minimal therapy-related toxicities.