4.7 Article

Multicentre phase I-II trial of capecitabine and oxaliplatin in combination with radiotherapy for unresectable pancreatic and biliary tract cancer: The CORGI-U study

Journal

RADIOTHERAPY AND ONCOLOGY
Volume 95, Issue 3, Pages 292-297

Publisher

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2010.04.004

Keywords

Biliary tract cancer; Capecitabine; Oxaliplatin; Pancreatic cancer; Radiotherapy

Funding

  1. Sanofi-Syntelabo AB
  2. Roche AB

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and Purpose: In this multicentre phase I-II trial we evaluated the feasibility and efficacy of capecitabine and oxaliplatin followed by the combination of these two drugs with radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic or biliary tract cancer. Material and methods: Thirty-nine patients with inextirpable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas, gallbladder or extrahepatic bile ducts were included. Two cycles of XELOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m(2) bid d1-14 + oxaliplatin 130 mg/m(2) d1, q3w) were followed by XELOX-RT (radiotherapy (50.4 Gy), combined with capecitabine 750-675 mg/m(2) bid every radiotherapy day and oxaliplatin 40-30 mg/m(2) once weekly). Primary end-points were tolerance (phase I) and objective response (phase II). Results: The maximum tolerated doses of oxaliplatin and capecitabine to combine with irradiation were 30 mg/m(2) and 675 mg/m(2), respectively. Twenty-one percent (95% CI: 9-38%) of evaluable patients achieved partial response. Five patients went through surgery (three R0 resections). Two-year survival was 28%, and estimated local tumour control rate at 2 years was 72%. The most common grade 3-4 toxicity was nausea and vomiting. Conclusions: XELOX-RT (30 mg/m(2) oxaliplatin/675 mg/m(2) capecitabine in combination with 50.4 Gy/28 fractions) was well tolerated and effective for locally advanced pancreatic and biliary tract cancer. (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd. Radiotherapy and Oncology 95 (2010) 292-297

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available