Advances in Immunotherapeutics in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) accounts for up to 95% of all pancreatic cancer cases and is the seventh-leading cause of cancer death. Poor prognosis is a result of late presentation, a lack of screening tests and the fact some patients develop resistance to chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Novel therapies like immunotherapeutics have been of recent interest in pancreatic cancer. However, this field remains in its infancy with much to unravel. Immunotherapy and other targeted therapies have yet to yield significant progress in treating PDAC, primarily due to our limited understanding of the disease immune mechanisms and its intricate interactions with the tumour microenvironment (TME). In this review we provide an overview of current novel immunotherapies which have been studied in the field of pancreatic cancer. We discuss their mechanisms, evidence available in pancreatic cancer as well as the limitations of such therapies. We showcase the potential role of combining novel therapies in PDAC, postulate their potential clinical implications and the hurdles associated with their use in PDAC. Therapies discussed with include programmed death checkpoint inhibitors, Cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, Chimeric Antigen Receptor-T cell therapy, oncolytic viral therapy and vaccine therapies including KRAS vaccines, Telomerase vaccines, Gastrin Vaccines, Survivin-targeting vaccines, Heat-shock protein (HSP) peptide complex-based vaccines, MUC-1 targeting vaccines, Listeria based vaccines and Dendritic cell-based vaccines.

Related collections

Most cited references 185

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Hallmarks of Cancer: New Dimensions

Douglas Hanahan (2022)

The hallmarks of cancer conceptualization is a heuristic tool for distilling the vast complexity of cancer phenotypes and genotypes into a provisional set of underlying principles. As knowledge of cancer mechanisms has progressed, other facets of the disease have emerged as potential refinements. Herein, the prospect is raised that phenotypic plasticity and disrupted differentiation is a discrete hallmark capability, and that nonmutational epigenetic reprogramming and polymorphic microbiomes both constitute distinctive enabling characteristics that facilitate the acquisition of hallmark capabilities. Additionally, senescent cells, of varying origins, may be added to the roster of functionally important cell types in the tumor microenvironment. SIGNIFICANCE: Cancer is daunting in the breadth and scope of its diversity, spanning genetics, cell and tissue biology, pathology, and response to therapy. Ever more powerful experimental and computational tools and technologies are providing an avalanche of "big data" about the myriad manifestations of the diseases that cancer encompasses. The integrative concept embodied in the hallmarks of cancer is helping to distill this complexity into an increasingly logical science, and the provisional new dimensions presented in this perspective may add value to that endeavor, to more fully understand mechanisms of cancer development and malignant progression, and apply that knowledge to cancer medicine.

0 comments Cited 1929 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Gut microbiome influences efficacy of PD-1–based immunotherapy against epithelial tumors

Bo Qu, Gladys Ferrere, Céline Clemenson … (2018)

Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting the PD-1/PD-L1 axis induce sustained clinical responses in a sizeable minority of cancer patients. Here, we show that primary resistance to ICI can be due to abnormal gut microbiome composition. Antibiotics (ATB) inhibited the clinical benefit of ICI in patients with advanced cancer. Fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) from cancer patients who responded to ICI (but not from non-responding patients) into germ-free or ATB-treated mice ameliorated the antitumor effects of PD-1 blockade. Metagenomics of patient stools at diagnosis revealed correlations between clinical responses to ICI and the relative abundance of Akkermansia muciniphila. Oral supplementation with A. muciniphila post-FMT with non-responder feces restored the efficacy of PD-1 blockade in an IL-12-dependent manner, by increasing the recruitment of CCR9+CXCR3+CD4+ T lymphocytes into tumor beds.

0 comments Cited 1657 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Thierry Conroy, Françoise Desseigne, Marc Ychou … (2011)

Data are lacking on the efficacy and safety of a combination chemotherapy regimen consisting of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (FOLFIRINOX) as compared with gemcitabine as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. We randomly assigned 342 patients with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 (on a scale of 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating a greater severity of illness) to receive FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, 85 mg per square meter of body-surface area; irinotecan, 180 mg per square meter; leucovorin, 400 mg per square meter; and fluorouracil, 400 mg per square meter given as a bolus followed by 2400 mg per square meter given as a 46-hour continuous infusion, every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg per square meter weekly for 7 of 8 weeks and then weekly for 3 of 4 weeks. Six months of chemotherapy were recommended in both groups in patients who had a response. The primary end point was overall survival. The median overall survival was 11.1 months in the FOLFIRINOX group as compared with 6.8 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for death, 0.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45 to 0.73; P<0.001). Median progression-free survival was 6.4 months in the FOLFIRINOX group and 3.3 months in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio for disease progression, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.59; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 31.6% in the FOLFIRINOX group versus 9.4% in the gemcitabine group (P<0.001). More adverse events were noted in the FOLFIRINOX group; 5.4% of patients in this group had febrile neutropenia. At 6 months, 31% of the patients in the FOLFIRINOX group had a definitive degradation of the quality of life versus 66% in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.70; P<0.001). As compared with gemcitabine, FOLFIRINOX was associated with a survival advantage and had increased toxicity. FOLFIRINOX is an option for the treatment of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and good performance status. (Funded by the French government and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00112658.).