Pancreatic Neoplasms (Locally Advanced Non-metastatic)Phase 1/2SCALOP-2NCT02024009
Systemic Therapy and Chemoradiation in Advanced Localised Pancreatic Cancer - 2
A Phase 1/2 study testing nab-paclitaxel, 60Gy in 30# and 50.4Gy in 28# in people with Pancreatic Neoplasms (Locally Advanced Non-metastatic), run by University of Oxford at 23 sites in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
This study will evaluate the role of increasing radiotherapy dose and addition of nelfinavir to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer that has not spread beyond the pancreas. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Pancreatic Neoplasms (Locally Advanced Non-metastatic)
- What is being tested?
- nab-paclitaxel, 60Gy in 30# and 50.4Gy in 28#
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Injection or infusion, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 159 participants
- Where
- 23 sitesUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- Mar 2016to 23 Jun 2021
- Phase
- Phase 1/2
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- 1. Aged 18 years or over
- Histologically or cytologically proven carcinoma of the pancreas
- Locally advanced, non-metastatic inoperable disease as per NCCN criteria (APPENDIX 2). The following types of interventions are allowed:
- Palliative bypass procedure
- Common bile duct stenting
- Primary pancreatic lesion 6 cm or less in diameter (taken from scan results)
Show all 15Show fewer
- World Health Organisation PS 0-1 (APPENDIX 1)
- Adequate haematological function: neutrophils ≥1.5 x 109/L, platelets ≥100 x 109/L
- Adequate liver function tests:
- Serum bilirubin ≤1.5 x ULN. In participants who have had a recent biliary drain and whose bilirubin is improving, a value of ≤3 x ULN is acceptable, however treatment should not start unless Bilirubin is ≤1.5 x ULN.
- AST and/or ALT ≤ 3 x ULN.
- Adequate renal function (GFR ≥ 40ml/min (Cockcroft \& Gault - APPENDIX 3))
- Written informed consent obtained
- Women of child-bearing potential (APPENDIX 6) must have negative serum or urine pregnancy test within 14 days prior to registration, must agree to use a highly effective contraception method during GEMABX treatment and for 6 months after last administration of GEMABX and to use an acceptable contraception method during chemoradiotherapy and for 6 months after completion of all treatment. (For a definition of highly effective and acceptable contraceptive methods see section 10.8)
- Male patients must be surgically sterile or must agree to use a condom during GEMABX treatment and for 6 months after last administration of GEMABX, and to use a condom during chemoradiotherapy and for three months after completion of chemoradiotherapy or, whichever date comes last.
Who cannot join
- Primary resectable cancer of the pancreas.
- Distant metastases
- Pregnant or breast-feeding patients.
- Any evidence of severe uncontrolled systemic diseases including uncontrolled coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction or stroke within the last 6 months, any major systemic or psychiatric co-morbidities or any other considerations that the PI judges might impact on patient safety or protocol compliance and achievement of the study aims.
- Previous malignancies in the preceding 3 years except for:
- In situ cancer of the uterine cervix
Show all 22Show fewer
- Adequately treated basal cell skin carcinoma
- Adequately treated early stage non-pancreatic malignancy in complete remission for at least 3 years
- Renal abnormalities including adult polycystic kidney disease or hydronephrosis or ipsilateral single kidney (i.e. functioning right kidney for head tumours; left kidney for tail tumours) that may preclude upper abdominal radiotherapy without damaging functional kidneys.
- Previous RT to upper abdomen
- Recurrent cancer following definitive pancreatic surgery
- Lymphoma or neuroendocrine tumours of the pancreas
- Known haemophilia A and B, chronic hepatitis type B or C.
- Other experimental treatment 6 weeks or less prior to registration into this study (including chemothera¬py and immunotherapy).
- Known hypersensitivity to any of the IMPs or any of their excipients.
- Known dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency
- Known galactose intolerance, Lapp-lactose deficiency or glucose-galactose malabsorption
- History of severe unexpected reaction to fluoropyrimidine therapies
- If the following concomitant medications cannot be discontinued temporarily during the CRT phase then the patients cannot enter the trial as they interact with capecitabine:
- Sorivudine and analogues e.g. brivudine
- Methotrexate.
- Allopurinol and dipyridamole
Trial locations and contacts
23 sites in 1 country.
23 sites in 1 country
United Kingdom23 sites
NHS Grampian, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary
Aberdeen, AB25 2ZN
The Clatterbridge Cancer Centre NHS Foundation Trust
Bebington, CH63 4JY
Belfast Health and Social Care Trust, Belfast City Hospital
Belfast, BT9 7AB
University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust, Bristol Haematology and Oncology Centre
Bristol, BS2 8ED
Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Addenbrooke's Hospital
Cambridge, CB2 0QQ
Velindre NHS Trust, Velindre Cancer Centre
Cardiff, CF14 2TL
East Suffolk and North Essex NHS Foundation Trust, Colchester District General Hospital
Colchester, CO4 5JL
Hull and East Yorkshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Castle Hill Hospital
Cottingham, HU16 5JQ
University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire NHS Trust, University Hospital Coventry
Coventry, CV2 2DX
Royal Surrey County Hospital
Guildford, GU2 7XX
Oxford University Hospitals, Churchill Cancer Centre
Headington, Oxfordshire, OX3 7LE
Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust, St James's University Hospital
Leeds, LS9 7TF
United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust, Lincoln County Hospital
Lincoln, LN2 5QY
North Middlesex University Hospital NHS Trust, North Middlesex Hospital
London, N18 1QX
University College London Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, University College London Hospital
London, NW1 2PG
Royal Free Hampstead NHS Trust, Royal Free Hospital
London, NW3 2QG
Hammersmith Hospital
London, W12 0HS
The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, The Christie Hospital
Manchester, M20 4BX
Milton Keynes University Hospital
Milton Keynes, MK6 5LD
Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital
Norwich, NR4 7UY
Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, City Hospital
Nottingham, NG5 1PB
Plymouth Hospitals NHS Trust, Derriford Hospital
Plymouth, PL6 8DH
Sheffield Teaching Hospitals, Weston Park Hospital
Sheffield, S10 2SJ
About this study
Official title: A Multi-centre Randomised Study of Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Capecitabine (+/-Nelfinavir) With High or Standard Dose Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-metastatic Pancreatic Cancer
This study will evaluate the role of increasing radiotherapy dose and addition of nelfinavir to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer that has not spread beyond the pancreas.
Currently in the United Kingdom (UK), either chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy followed by CRT can be used in the management of inoperable pancreatic cancer that has not spread. CRT consists of 25-30 radiotherapy treatments in combination with chemotherapy. Although this treatment is effective in controlling local symptoms and slowing down the pace of cancer, in most cases it is unable to shrink it enough to make it operable. Some of the reasons for this could be the lack of oxygen and lack of blood flow within the tumour making it resistant to the effects of CRT. This study will investigate whether increasing the dose of radiotherapy, or increasing the oxygen and blood supply to the tumour by giving nelfinavir, or a combination of both, can improve outcomes. We also want to know what the additional toxicities from such intensive approaches are.
Read more
All participants will initially receive 12 weeks of chemotherapy, and those with stable or responding disease will receive further study treatment. The treatment allocation, initially to one of the four options, but as of 26Feb2020, to one of two options, as outlined below will be done at random by computer and neither the doctor nor the patient can choose the treatment option. The process of randomisation ensures that all treatment arms are equally balanced in terms of patient and tumour characteristics, and to reduce the possibility of bias.
The study will consist of 2 stages. In the 1st stage we aimed to find the right dose of nelfinavir to combine with CRT, requiring 27 participants of whom up to 18 will receive nelfinavir together with CRT. The Maximum Tolerated Dose of nelfinavir for Stage 2 has been established as 1250mg bd based on the data of 4 patients in the Stage 1, 1250mg cohort. In the 2nd stage, we want to find out the benefits of this approach over and above standard treatments and therefore we will recruit the order of 168 participants and allocate 96 to 1 of the 4 following treatment arms (As from 26Feb2020, randomisation will continue into one of two arms):
Arm A: Nelfinavir together with CRT (arm A closed on 26Feb2020) Arm B: CRT (without nelfinavir) Arm C: Nelfinavir together with CRT (but using a higher than conventional dose of radiotherapy) (arm C closed on 26Feb2020) Arm D: CRT without nelfinavir (but using a higher than conventional dose of radiotherapy) Participants allocated to any of the two arms, following closure of Arms A \& C on 26Feb2020, will receive one further cycle of chemotherapy prior to starting chemoradiotherapy (without nelfinavir). This is to allow time for radiotherapy planning.
Participants who are ineligible or refuse randomisation will be treated as per local standard but will remain in the study for follow up every 12 weeks. Their data will contribute to an Overall Survival (OS) analysis.
Read the detailed description
Pancreatic cancer has a poor outcome. Approximately 8000 cases are diagnosed in the UK each year and approximately 8000 patients die from the disease [1]. 20% of the patients are operable at diagnosis, 30-40% have locally advanced inoperable disease [LANPC] and another 40-50% have metastatic disease. Patients with LANPC have a relatively better prognosis compared to patients with metastatic disease (median overall survival 10-12 months and 5-6 months respectively). Currently, treatment options for LANPC include:
- Primary chemotherapy
- Primary chemoradiation (CRT) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy
- Induction chemotherapy followed by CRT
Studies investigating primary chemotherapy vs. primary CRT have reported overall survival between ten to 12 months and there are conflicting reports as to whether chemotherapy alone or primary CRT is superior [2, 3].
More recently, there has been a shift to using induction chemotherapy to pre-select patients who are suitable for CRT. The LAP07 trial [4] compared chemotherapy alone (gemcitabine with/without erlotinib) versus same chemotherapy for 4 months followed by consolidation capecitabine-based CRT. The study aimed to recruit over 700 patients but closed early on recommendation of IDMC following a planned interim analysis after 442 patients. This study failed to show superiority of consolidation CRT over continuing chemotherapy alone (median overall survival 15.2 months vs. 16.4 months, log rank p=0.8) but confirmed good tolerance of CRT in multi-institutional setting (Grade 3/4 gastro-intestinal toxicity 5.9%; Grade 3/4 neutropenia 3.1%) [4]. The investigators concluded that both chemotherapy alone and consolidation CRT are options for this group of patients and further trials should investigate intensifying both radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy strategies.
In the UK, the recently reported SCALOP trial randomised patients to gemcitabine or capecitabine based CRT following 4 months of induction GEMCAP chemotherapy [5]. 114 patients were recruited from 28 centres over 2 years, and 74 non-progressive patients were randomised to CRT. This study demonstrated UK's feasibility to recruit to CRT trials in pancreatic cancer and deliver high quality RT within a well-controlled Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance programme coordinated by the NCRI RTTQA Group. SCALOP suggested superiority of capecitabine-based CRT over gemcitabine based-CRT in terms of overall survival (median overall survival 15.2 vs. 13.4 months, HR 0.39, p=0.012) and treatment related Grade 3/4 toxicity (haematological 0% vs. 18%, p=0.008; non-haematological 12% vs. 26%, p=0·12). The outcome/toxicity in the cape-RT arm was very similar to that reported in LAP07 study, and capecitabine could now be considered as the preferred radio-sensitizer in the context of pancreatic CRT.
The importance of local control in LANPC Although LANPC and metastatic pancreatic cancer have been traditionally treated similarly with chemotherapy under the premise that this is largely a systemic disease, recent developments in molecular and genetic aspects of pancreatic cancer would suggest that this disease is heterogeneous with different genetic subtypes and the systemic nature of the disease can no longer be assumed. Studies have shown that nearly a third of patients with LANPC die as a result of local progression of their disease rather than systemic spread; the loss of Dpc4 gene has been correlated with systemic spread of the disease whereas patients with intact Dpc4 have local tumour predominance [6, 7]. Local progression occurs in more than half the cases after conventional CRT (SCALOP unpublished data) and one study has shown that local failure may be a predictor of early mortality (HR 2.15; p=0.0074, [8]). One meta-analysis of 4,394 patients suggests that one-third of initially unresectable tumours may become operable following neo-adjuvant therapy [9], and improving local control is likely to become more relevant in the face of improved systemic treatment like GEMABX (gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel) and FOLFIRINOX, as patients are likely to live long enough to develop local symptoms.
Radiotherapy dose escalation It is widely accepted that adenocarcinoma is a radio-resistant tumour and radiation doses of less than 60-70Gy are unlikely to eradicate the disease. However current pancreatic CRT schedules (45-54Gy in 25-30 fractions) are limited by the tolerance dose of the surrounding organs at risk (OARs), i.e., small bowel, duodenum, stomach, liver and kidneys. Using current dose schedules, local failure occurs in 40-60% cases despite CRT [8, 10, 11] and <5% of patients show radiological or pathological complete response following treatment [9, 12].
A small retrospective study has shown that RT dose ≥ 54Gy was associated with a trend towards improved overall survival (11.3 mo. vs. 6.8 mo., p=0.089) [13]. Another Phase I dose intensification study explored the role of escalating dose per fraction, and a higher Biological Equivalent Dose (BED) of RT was delivered (dose escalated from 50 to 60 Gy in 25 fractions, concurrent with gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 weekly) [14]. The recommended phase II dose was 55Gy in 25 fractions, at which the DLT (Dose Limiting toxicity) probability was 0.24; of the 50 patients recruited to the study, the median OS was 14.8 months with a 2-year OS of 30%; 12 underwent resection (R0=10) with a median OS of 32 months in resected patients. The promising outcome and acceptable toxicity seen in this study suggests that role of RT dose escalation should be further investigated in a randomised trial.
Although concerns about safe radiation doses to the surrounding critical organs has previously discouraged dose escalation studies, modern day technical advancement with Intensity Modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and Image Guided RT (IGRT) allows precise delivery of radiotherapy while reducing dose to OARs [14-16]. A dose of 59.4Gy/33 fractions has been safely delivered in combination with gemcitabine, cisplatin and RT in the ARC I and the ARC II studies [17](see below ). A hypothetical planning study from the MD Anderson group has demonstrated that dose to the pancreas can be escalated to 72Gy/36 fractions based on relationship of GTV to the gastro intestinal-OARs, using IMRT or proton therapy [18]. Taken together, these studies indicate that radiation dose in the region of 60Gy using conventional fractionation and conservative radiation volumes could be investigated as a component of dose escalation in a multi-centre 'trial, within constraints of a rigorous Radiotherapy Quality Assurance programme.
Nelfinavir in pancreatic cancer CRT Pancreatic cancer remains refractory to most conventional therapies and is driven by multiple oncogenic mutations including KRAS mutation and PTEN loss. EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor), KRAS and PIK3CA signalling are mediated in part through PI3K (Phospho-Inositol-3 Kinase) and Akt signalling. Preclinical data suggest that PI3K-inhibition using HIV protease inhibitors including nelfinavir reduce radioresistance [19, 20] and downregulates phosphorylation of Akt at Ser473 leading to radiosensitization [21, 22]. As Akt pathway is overactive in tumours but not normal tissue, it causes selective radiosensitization without aggravating RT mediated normal tissue damage. This radiosensitization effect is seen even in KRAS mutant pancreatic cell lines [19], which is highly relevant in clinical practice as >90% of pancreatic tumours are KRAS mutant. The inhibition of this pathway has also been shown to normalise tumour vasculature, increase vascular flow and perfusion and reduce hypoxia in tumour xenografts [23, 24], all of which may also contribute to the radiosensitizing effect seen with this class of drugs. As nelfinavir has been widely used as an anti-retroviral agent, there is a wealth of safety data on this agent [25] and a retrospective study has shown no increase in radiation related acute toxicity compared to control [26]. The ARC-I trial, a phase I study which tested the toxicity of nelfinavir-based CRT in LANPC. Twelve patients were treated with a RT dose of 59.4Gy radiation in 33 fractions in combination with nelfinavir (1250mg bd, starting 3 days before start of RT, until final day of RT), gemcitabine (Dose level 1: 200mg/m2; Dose level 2: 300mg/m2) and cisplatin 30mg/m2 with the chemotherapy being delivered on days 1, 8, 22, 29 [17]. Grade 3 /4 non-haematological toxicity was reported in 16.7%; complete radiological response on FDG-PET was seen in 50% of the cases and R0 resection was achieved in 6 patients. Median OS was 18 months. A subsequent phase II study, ARC II (35), tested the efficacy and toxicity of the combination at the higher dose of Gemcitabine (300mg/m2) in 23 patients. Although upfront CRT (without induction chemotherapy) was used, median and 1-year overall survival were 17.4 months and 73.4% respectively, which compares well historic studies of primary CRT. Key Grade 3/4 toxicities (nausea/vomiting 21.7%; diarrhoea 21.7%; fatigue 17.4%; neutropenia 8.7%; thrombocytopenia 39.1%) is likely to have been contributed by the gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy and large RT fields which included prophylactic nodal irradiation. In addition to this study, a recently reported phase I study combining radical CRT with nelfinavir in stage IIIA and B non-small cell lung cancer showed minimal toxicity with five out of nine complete responses [27]. Nelfinavir has demonstrated promising radio-sensitizing effects and therefore merits further investigation in a phase II trial.
Systemic therapy in pancreatic cancer Both FOLFIRINOX (5FU, Folinic Acid, Irinotecan, Oxaliplatin) [28] and GEMABX [29] are treatment options for patients with good performance status advanced pancreatic cancer.
The MPACT study [29] compared gemcitabine alone with a combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in 861 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The OS (8.5 vs. 6.7 months, p<0.001), PFS (5.5 vs. 3.7 months, p<0.001) and overall response rate (23% vs. 7%, p<0.001) favoured the combination therapy. Although Grade 3/4 neutropenia was seen in 38% of patients (cf 27% on gemcitabine alone), incidence of febrile neutropenia was low (3%) and other toxicities were manageable (Grade 3/4 fatigue 17% vs. 7%; Grade 3/4 neuropathy 17% vs. 1%, improved to Grade 0/1 in 29 days). Relative protocol doses of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel were 75% and 81% respectively (cf 85% in the gemcitabine arm) and suggested that the regimen is well tolerated. Moreover, the relative lack of non-overlapping toxicity with capecitabine-RT, most importantly gastro-intestinal toxicity, makes it an attractive regimen to use prior to consolidation CRT.
2.3 Rationale Local control is important in pancreatic cancer but current CRT schedules could be refined. Improving local control through RT dose escalation or enhanced radiosensitization may improve local control and overall survival in pancreatic cancer. We wish to test this hypothesis in the SCALOP-2 trial.
- Being tested
- nab-paclitaxel, 60Gy in 30#, 50.4Gy in 28#, Nelfinavir, Capecitabine
- Keywords
- chemoradiotherapy, nelfinavir, abraxane, gemcitabine, radiotherapy, capecitabine
- Medical subject headings
- Pancreatic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
nab-paclitaxelDrug
Also called Abraxane
Abraxane is a proprietary solvent-free, protein-stabilized formulation of paclitaxel comprised of paclitaxel and human albumin in a noncrystalline amorphous state
60Gy in 30#Radiation
50.4Gy in 28#Radiation
NelfinavirDrug
Also called Viracept
VIRACEPT® (nelfinavir mesylate) is an inhibitor of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease.
CapecitabineDrug
Given in combination with gemcitabine, known as GemCap.
GemcitabineDrug
Also called GEMZAR
Gemcitabine is indicated for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. It is administered as an infusion
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Arm A | Experimental | 12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction Gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel (GEMABX) chemotherapy then 1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst radiotherapy (RT) planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + Nelfinavir** + 50.4 Grays (Gy) in 28# (arm A closed on 26Feb2020 due to lack of efficacy of nelfinavir)
*1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15. Receives: Drug: nab-paclitaxel; Radiation: 50.4Gy in 28#; Drug: Nelfinavir; Drug: Capecitabine; Drug: Gemcitabine |
| Arm B | Experimental | 12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction GEMABX chemotherapy then 1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst RT planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + 50.4Gy in 28#
*1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15. Receives: Drug: nab-paclitaxel; Radiation: 50.4Gy in 28#; Drug: Capecitabine; Drug: Gemcitabine |
| Arm C | Experimental | 12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction GEMABX chemotherapy then
1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst RT planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + Nelfinavir** + 60Gy in 30# (arm C closed on 26Feb2020 due to lack of efficacy of nelfinavir)
*1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15 Receives: Drug: nab-paclitaxel; Radiation: 60Gy in 30#; Drug: Nelfinavir; Drug: Gemcitabine |
| Arm D | Experimental | 12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction GEMABX chemotherapy then
1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst RT planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + 60Gy in 30#
*1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15. Receives: Drug: nab-paclitaxel; Radiation: 60Gy in 30#; Drug: Gemcitabine |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Progression free survival
Concurrent biological question (± Nelfinavir): Progression Free Survival (PFS) (time from registration to event (progression or death if death occurred without progression). Patients who are not assessed to have disease progression and are not observed to die during the course of the trial will be censored at the last known progression free follow-up date).
Measured: From date of registration until date of first documented progression or death ( if death occurred without progression), assessed up until last patient last visit (43 months).
Overall survival in LANPC
RT dose question (50.4Gy v 60Gy): Overall survival (OS) (time from registration to event (death by any cause); patients who are not observed to die during the course of the trial will be censored at the last known date alive prior to end of trial date)
Measured: From date of registration until date of first documented (death by any cause), assessed up until Last Patient Last Visit (43 months)
Secondary outcomes (12)
Concurrent biological question: Toxicity (Serious Adverse Events scored by using NCI CTCAE v4.03),
Toxicity (-nelfinavir vs. +nelfinavir; 50.4Gy vs. 60Gy): Serious Adverse Events will be scored using the NCI CTCAE v4.03 at registration, during treatment, post treatment and during follow up of randomised participants. Serious adverse events will be collected in "real-time".
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
Concurrent biological question: treatment compliance measured using patient diary cards
Chemotherapy treatment compliance (-nelfinavir vs. +nelfinavir) measured through use of patient diary cards to count the number of days patient indicated they had taken the prescribed dose.
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
Concurrent biological question: overall survival
-Overall survival: (-nelfinavir vs. +nelfinavir): Time from registration to death by any cause and those still alive will be censored at time last known alive
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
Concurrent biological question: resection rates
-Resection rates: • Surgical resection (of primary tumour) rate (-nelfinavir vs. +nelfinavir; 50.4Gy vs. 60Gy)
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
RT dose question: PFS
- Progression free survival (time to event (progression)) (50.4Gy vs. 60Gy) ,
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
RT dose question: 12-month OS rate,
- Progression free survival (time to event (progression)) (50.4Gy vs. 60Gy) ,
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
RT dose question: resection rates,
- Progression free survival (time to event (progression)) (50.4Gy vs. 60Gy) ,
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
Quality of life assessment by EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire
Quality of life will be assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 V3.0 scoring system which uses the participant response categories "Not at all, "A little", "Quite a bit" and "Very much" to 30 questions on heath.
Measured: Quality of life using EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was assessed at baseline, month 4 , 8 30, 39, 52 .
Quality of life assessment by PAN26 questionnaire
Quality of life will be assessed by the PAN26 V1.0 scoring system which uses the participant response categories "Not at all, "A little", "Quite a bit" and "Very much" to 25 questions on health-related symptoms and problems.
Measured: Quality of life using PAN26 questionnaire was assessed at baseline, month 4 , 8 30, 39, 52 .
Quality of life assessment by the EQ-5D questionnaire
Quality of life will be assessed by the EQ-5D questionnaire V1.0 using 5 categories of health related questions asking participants to identify which sentence best describes them from" I have no problems to..." until "I am unable to...."and a scale from 0-100 (100 means the best health you can imagine, 0 means the worst health you can imagine).
Measured: Quality of life using the EQ-5D questionnaire was assessed at baseline, month 4 , 8 30, 39, 52 .
CA19-9 level, 1-year local control rate
- CA19-9 level: in units per ml
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
Disease response
Disease response at each CT scan based on RECIST v1.1 in APPENDIX 4: complete response, partial response, progressive disease, stable disease
Measured: 12 months from date of registration
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted31 Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Study startMar 2016
- Primary completion23 Jun 2021
- Study completion23 Jun 2021
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pancreatic Neoplasms (Locally Advanced Non-metastatic)Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of OxfordThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 1/2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 159 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Oxford
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Celgene, Cancer Research UK
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Somnath Mukherjee, MD, FRCP, FRCR, Principal investigator, somnath.mukherjee@oncology.ox.ac.uk
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02024009
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- OCTO_063
- Acronym
- SCALOP-2
- Status last verified
- Jul 2021
- First submitted
- 23 Dec 2013
- Last updated
- 25 Jul 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Strauss VY, Shaw R, Virdee PS, Hurt CN, Ward E, Tranter B, Patel N, Bridgewater J, Parsons P, Radhakrishna G, O'Neill E, Sebag-Montefiore D, Hawkins M, Corrie PG, Maughan T, Mukherjee S. Study protocol: a multi-centre randomised study of induction chemotherapy followed by capecitabine +/- nelfinavir with high- or standard-dose radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP-2). BMC Cancer. 2019 Feb 4;19(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5307-z.
PubMed 30717707
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Jul 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Multi-centre Randomised Study of Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Capecitabine (+/-Nelfinavir) With High or Standard Dose Radiotherapy for Locally Advanced Non-metastatic Pancreatic Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02024009
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- SCALOP-2 / OCTO_063
- Keywords
- chemoradiotherapy, nelfinavir, abraxane, gemcitabine, radiotherapy, capecitabine
- Phase
- Phase 1/2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 159 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of OxfordUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Celgene, Cancer Research UK
- Study start
- Mar 2016 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 23 Jun 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 23 Jun 2021 (actual)
- First posted
- 31 Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will evaluate the role of increasing radiotherapy dose and addition of nelfinavir to chemoradiotherapy (CRT) in patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer that has not spread beyond the pancreas.
Currently in the United Kingdom (UK), either chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy followed by CRT can be used in the management of inoperable pancreatic cancer that has not spread. CRT consists of 25-30 radiotherapy treatments in combination with chemotherapy. Although this treatment is effective in controlling local symptoms and slowing down the pace of cancer, in most cases it is unable to shrink it enough to make it operable. Some of the reasons for this could be the lack of oxygen and lack of blood flow within the tumour making it resistant to the effects of CRT. This study will investigate whether increasing the dose of radiotherapy, or increasing the oxygen and blood supply to the tumour by giving nelfinavir, or a combination of both, can improve outcomes. We also want to know what the additional toxicities from such intensive approaches are.
All participants will initially receive 12 weeks of chemotherapy, and those with stable or responding disease will receive further study treatment. The treatment allocation, initially to one of the four options, but as of 26Feb2020, to one of two options, as outlined below will be done at random by computer and neither the doctor nor the patient can choose the treatment option. The process of randomisation ensures that all treatment arms are equally balanced in terms of patient and tumour characteristics, and to reduce the possibility of bias.
The study will consist of 2 stages. In the 1st stage we aimed to find the right dose of nelfinavir to combine with CRT, requiring 27 participants of whom up to 18 will receive nelfinavir together with CRT. The Maximum Tolerated Dose of nelfinavir for Stage 2 has been established as 1250mg bd based on the data of 4 patients in the Stage 1, 1250mg cohort. In the 2nd stage, we want to find out the benefits of this approach over and above standard treatments and therefore we will recruit the order of 168 participants and allocate 96 to 1 of the 4 following treatment arms (As from 26Feb2020, randomisation will continue into one of two arms):
Arm A: Nelfinavir together with CRT (arm A closed on 26Feb2020) Arm B: CRT (without nelfinavir) Arm C: Nelfinavir together with CRT (but using a higher than conventional dose of radiotherapy) (arm C closed on 26Feb2020) Arm D: CRT without nelfinavir (but using a higher than conventional dose of radiotherapy) Participants allocated to any of the two arms, following closure of Arms A \& C on 26Feb2020, will receive one further cycle of chemotherapy prior to starting chemoradiotherapy (without nelfinavir). This is to allow time for radiotherapy planning.
Participants who are ineligible or refuse randomisation will be treated as per local standard but will remain in the study for follow up every 12 weeks. Their data will contribute to an Overall Survival (OS) analysis.
Detailed description
Pancreatic cancer has a poor outcome. Approximately 8000 cases are diagnosed in the UK each year and approximately 8000 patients die from the disease [1]. 20% of the patients are operable at diagnosis, 30-40% have locally advanced inoperable disease [LANPC] and another 40-50% have metastatic disease. Patients with LANPC have a relatively better prognosis compared to patients with metastatic disease (median overall survival 10-12 months and 5-6 months respectively). Currently, treatment options for LANPC include:
- Primary chemotherapy
- Primary chemoradiation (CRT) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy
- Induction chemotherapy followed by CRT
Studies investigating primary chemotherapy vs. primary CRT have reported overall survival between ten to 12 months and there are conflicting reports as to whether chemotherapy alone or primary CRT is superior [2, 3].
More recently, there has been a shift to using induction chemotherapy to pre-select patients who are suitable for CRT. The LAP07 trial [4] compared chemotherapy alone (gemcitabine with/without erlotinib) versus same chemotherapy for 4 months followed by consolidation capecitabine-based CRT. The study aimed to recruit over 700 patients but closed early on recommendation of IDMC following a planned interim analysis after 442 patients. This study failed to show superiority of consolidation CRT over continuing chemotherapy alone (median overall survival 15.2 months vs. 16.4 months, log rank p=0.8) but confirmed good tolerance of CRT in multi-institutional setting (Grade 3/4 gastro-intestinal toxicity 5.9%; Grade 3/4 neutropenia 3.1%) [4]. The investigators concluded that both chemotherapy alone and consolidation CRT are options for this group of patients and further trials should investigate intensifying both radiotherapy (RT) and chemotherapy strategies.
In the UK, the recently reported SCALOP trial randomised patients to gemcitabine or capecitabine based CRT following 4 months of induction GEMCAP chemotherapy [5]. 114 patients were recruited from 28 centres over 2 years, and 74 non-progressive patients were randomised to CRT. This study demonstrated UK's feasibility to recruit to CRT trials in pancreatic cancer and deliver high quality RT within a well-controlled Radiotherapy Trials Quality Assurance programme coordinated by the NCRI RTTQA Group. SCALOP suggested superiority of capecitabine-based CRT over gemcitabine based-CRT in terms of overall survival (median overall survival 15.2 vs. 13.4 months, HR 0.39, p=0.012) and treatment related Grade 3/4 toxicity (haematological 0% vs. 18%, p=0.008; non-haematological 12% vs. 26%, p=0·12). The outcome/toxicity in the cape-RT arm was very similar to that reported in LAP07 study, and capecitabine could now be considered as the preferred radio-sensitizer in the context of pancreatic CRT.
The importance of local control in LANPC Although LANPC and metastatic pancreatic cancer have been traditionally treated similarly with chemotherapy under the premise that this is largely a systemic disease, recent developments in molecular and genetic aspects of pancreatic cancer would suggest that this disease is heterogeneous with different genetic subtypes and the systemic nature of the disease can no longer be assumed. Studies have shown that nearly a third of patients with LANPC die as a result of local progression of their disease rather than systemic spread; the loss of Dpc4 gene has been correlated with systemic spread of the disease whereas patients with intact Dpc4 have local tumour predominance [6, 7]. Local progression occurs in more than half the cases after conventional CRT (SCALOP unpublished data) and one study has shown that local failure may be a predictor of early mortality (HR 2.15; p=0.0074, [8]). One meta-analysis of 4,394 patients suggests that one-third of initially unresectable tumours may become operable following neo-adjuvant therapy [9], and improving local control is likely to become more relevant in the face of improved systemic treatment like GEMABX (gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel) and FOLFIRINOX, as patients are likely to live long enough to develop local symptoms.
Radiotherapy dose escalation It is widely accepted that adenocarcinoma is a radio-resistant tumour and radiation doses of less than 60-70Gy are unlikely to eradicate the disease. However current pancreatic CRT schedules (45-54Gy in 25-30 fractions) are limited by the tolerance dose of the surrounding organs at risk (OARs), i.e., small bowel, duodenum, stomach, liver and kidneys. Using current dose schedules, local failure occurs in 40-60% cases despite CRT [8, 10, 11] and <5% of patients show radiological or pathological complete response following treatment [9, 12].
A small retrospective study has shown that RT dose ≥ 54Gy was associated with a trend towards improved overall survival (11.3 mo. vs. 6.8 mo., p=0.089) [13]. Another Phase I dose intensification study explored the role of escalating dose per fraction, and a higher Biological Equivalent Dose (BED) of RT was delivered (dose escalated from 50 to 60 Gy in 25 fractions, concurrent with gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 weekly) [14]. The recommended phase II dose was 55Gy in 25 fractions, at which the DLT (Dose Limiting toxicity) probability was 0.24; of the 50 patients recruited to the study, the median OS was 14.8 months with a 2-year OS of 30%; 12 underwent resection (R0=10) with a median OS of 32 months in resected patients. The promising outcome and acceptable toxicity seen in this study suggests that role of RT dose escalation should be further investigated in a randomised trial.
Although concerns about safe radiation doses to the surrounding critical organs has previously discouraged dose escalation studies, modern day technical advancement with Intensity Modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and Image Guided RT (IGRT) allows precise delivery of radiotherapy while reducing dose to OARs [14-16]. A dose of 59.4Gy/33 fractions has been safely delivered in combination with gemcitabine, cisplatin and RT in the ARC I and the ARC II studies [17](see below ). A hypothetical planning study from the MD Anderson group has demonstrated that dose to the pancreas can be escalated to 72Gy/36 fractions based on relationship of GTV to the gastro intestinal-OARs, using IMRT or proton therapy [18]. Taken together, these studies indicate that radiation dose in the region of 60Gy using conventional fractionation and conservative radiation volumes could be investigated as a component of dose escalation in a multi-centre 'trial, within constraints of a rigorous Radiotherapy Quality Assurance programme.
Nelfinavir in pancreatic cancer CRT Pancreatic cancer remains refractory to most conventional therapies and is driven by multiple oncogenic mutations including KRAS mutation and PTEN loss. EGFR (Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor), KRAS and PIK3CA signalling are mediated in part through PI3K (Phospho-Inositol-3 Kinase) and Akt signalling. Preclinical data suggest that PI3K-inhibition using HIV protease inhibitors including nelfinavir reduce radioresistance [19, 20] and downregulates phosphorylation of Akt at Ser473 leading to radiosensitization [21, 22]. As Akt pathway is overactive in tumours but not normal tissue, it causes selective radiosensitization without aggravating RT mediated normal tissue damage. This radiosensitization effect is seen even in KRAS mutant pancreatic cell lines [19], which is highly relevant in clinical practice as >90% of pancreatic tumours are KRAS mutant. The inhibition of this pathway has also been shown to normalise tumour vasculature, increase vascular flow and perfusion and reduce hypoxia in tumour xenografts [23, 24], all of which may also contribute to the radiosensitizing effect seen with this class of drugs. As nelfinavir has been widely used as an anti-retroviral agent, there is a wealth of safety data on this agent [25] and a retrospective study has shown no increase in radiation related acute toxicity compared to control [26]. The ARC-I trial, a phase I study which tested the toxicity of nelfinavir-based CRT in LANPC. Twelve patients were treated with a RT dose of 59.4Gy radiation in 33 fractions in combination with nelfinavir (1250mg bd, starting 3 days before start of RT, until final day of RT), gemcitabine (Dose level 1: 200mg/m2; Dose level 2: 300mg/m2) and cisplatin 30mg/m2 with the chemotherapy being delivered on days 1, 8, 22, 29 [17]. Grade 3 /4 non-haematological toxicity was reported in 16.7%; complete radiological response on FDG-PET was seen in 50% of the cases and R0 resection was achieved in 6 patients. Median OS was 18 months. A subsequent phase II study, ARC II (35), tested the efficacy and toxicity of the combination at the higher dose of Gemcitabine (300mg/m2) in 23 patients. Although upfront CRT (without induction chemotherapy) was used, median and 1-year overall survival were 17.4 months and 73.4% respectively, which compares well historic studies of primary CRT. Key Grade 3/4 toxicities (nausea/vomiting 21.7%; diarrhoea 21.7%; fatigue 17.4%; neutropenia 8.7%; thrombocytopenia 39.1%) is likely to have been contributed by the gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy and large RT fields which included prophylactic nodal irradiation. In addition to this study, a recently reported phase I study combining radical CRT with nelfinavir in stage IIIA and B non-small cell lung cancer showed minimal toxicity with five out of nine complete responses [27]. Nelfinavir has demonstrated promising radio-sensitizing effects and therefore merits further investigation in a phase II trial.
Systemic therapy in pancreatic cancer Both FOLFIRINOX (5FU, Folinic Acid, Irinotecan, Oxaliplatin) [28] and GEMABX [29] are treatment options for patients with good performance status advanced pancreatic cancer.
The MPACT study [29] compared gemcitabine alone with a combination of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel in 861 patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The OS (8.5 vs. 6.7 months, p<0.001), PFS (5.5 vs. 3.7 months, p<0.001) and overall response rate (23% vs. 7%, p<0.001) favoured the combination therapy. Although Grade 3/4 neutropenia was seen in 38% of patients (cf 27% on gemcitabine alone), incidence of febrile neutropenia was low (3%) and other toxicities were manageable (Grade 3/4 fatigue 17% vs. 7%; Grade 3/4 neuropathy 17% vs. 1%, improved to Grade 0/1 in 29 days). Relative protocol doses of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel were 75% and 81% respectively (cf 85% in the gemcitabine arm) and suggested that the regimen is well tolerated. Moreover, the relative lack of non-overlapping toxicity with capecitabine-RT, most importantly gastro-intestinal toxicity, makes it an attractive regimen to use prior to consolidation CRT.
2.3 Rationale Local control is important in pancreatic cancer but current CRT schedules could be refined. Improving local control through RT dose escalation or enhanced radiosensitization may improve local control and overall survival in pancreatic cancer. We wish to test this hypothesis in the SCALOP-2 trial.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Factorial
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Arm A | Experimental | Drug: nab-paclitaxel, Radiation: 50.4Gy in 28#, Drug: Nelfinavir, Drug: Capecitabine, Drug: Gemcitabine12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction Gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel (GEMABX) chemotherapy then 1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst radiotherapy (RT) planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + Nelfinavir** + 50.4 Grays (Gy) in 28# (arm A closed on 26Feb2020 due to lack of efficacy of nelfinavir) *1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15. |
| Arm B | Experimental | Drug: nab-paclitaxel, Radiation: 50.4Gy in 28#, Drug: Capecitabine, Drug: Gemcitabine12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction GEMABX chemotherapy then 1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst RT planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + 50.4Gy in 28# *1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15. |
| Arm C | Experimental | Drug: nab-paclitaxel, Radiation: 60Gy in 30#, Drug: Nelfinavir, Drug: Gemcitabine12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction GEMABX chemotherapy then 1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst RT planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + Nelfinavir** + 60Gy in 30# (arm C closed on 26Feb2020 due to lack of efficacy of nelfinavir) *1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15 |
| Arm D | Experimental | Drug: nab-paclitaxel, Radiation: 60Gy in 30#, Drug: Gemcitabine12 weeks (3 cycles) of induction GEMABX chemotherapy then 1 cycle of GEMABX* whilst RT planned then capecitabine (830mg/m2 oral bd) + 60Gy in 30# *1 cycle GEMABX = 28 day cycle of intravenous Abraxane 125mg/m2 followed by gemcitabine 1000mg/m2 on day 1, 8 and 15. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (15 listed)
- 1. Aged 18 years or over
- Histologically or cytologically proven carcinoma of the pancreas
- Locally advanced, non-metastatic inoperable disease as per NCCN criteria (APPENDIX 2). The following types of interventions are allowed:
- Primary pancreatic lesion 6 cm or less in diameter (taken from scan results)
- World Health Organisation PS 0-1 (APPENDIX 1)
Key exclusion criteria (22 listed)
- Primary resectable cancer of the pancreas.
- Distant metastases
- Pregnant or breast-feeding patients.
- Any evidence of severe uncontrolled systemic diseases including uncontrolled coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction or stroke within the last 6 months, any major systemic or psychiatric co-morbidities or any other considerations that the PI judges might impact on patient safety or protocol compliance and achievement of the study aims.
- Previous malignancies in the preceding 3 years except for:
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| nab-paclitaxelAlso: AbraxaneAbraxane is a proprietary solvent-free, protein-stabilized formulation of paclitaxel comprised of paclitaxel and human albumin in a noncrystalline amorphous state | Drug | Arm A, Arm B, Arm C, Arm D |
| 60Gy in 30# | Radiation | Arm C, Arm D |
| 50.4Gy in 28# | Radiation | Arm A, Arm B |
| NelfinavirAlso: ViraceptVIRACEPT® (nelfinavir mesylate) is an inhibitor of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease. | Drug | Arm A, Arm C |
| CapecitabineGiven in combination with gemcitabine, known as GemCap. | Drug | Arm A, Arm B |
| GemcitabineAlso: GEMZARGemcitabine is indicated for treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. It is administered as an infusion | Drug | Arm A, Arm B, Arm C, Arm D |
Primary outcome
Progression free survival
Time frame: From date of registration until date of first documented progression or death ( if death occurred without progression), assessed up until last patient last visit (43 months).
Concurrent biological question (± Nelfinavir): Progression Free Survival (PFS) (time from registration to event (progression or death if death occurred without progression). Patients who are not assessed to have disease progression and are not observed to die during the course of the trial will be censored at the last known progression free follow-up date).
Overall survival in LANPC
Time frame: From date of registration until date of first documented (death by any cause), assessed up until Last Patient Last Visit (43 months)
RT dose question (50.4Gy v 60Gy): Overall survival (OS) (time from registration to event (death by any cause); patients who are not observed to die during the course of the trial will be censored at the last known date alive prior to end of trial date)
12 secondary outcomes
Concurrent biological question: Toxicity (Serious Adverse Events scored by using NCI CTCAE v4.03),
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
Concurrent biological question: treatment compliance measured using patient diary cards
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
Concurrent biological question: overall survival
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
Concurrent biological question: resection rates
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
RT dose question: PFS
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
RT dose question: 12-month OS rate,
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
RT dose question: resection rates,
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
Quality of life assessment by EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire
Time frame: Quality of life using EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire was assessed at baseline, month 4 , 8 30, 39, 52 .
Quality of life assessment by PAN26 questionnaire
Time frame: Quality of life using PAN26 questionnaire was assessed at baseline, month 4 , 8 30, 39, 52 .
Quality of life assessment by the EQ-5D questionnaire
Time frame: Quality of life using the EQ-5D questionnaire was assessed at baseline, month 4 , 8 30, 39, 52 .
CA19-9 level, 1-year local control rate
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
Disease response
Time frame: 12 months from date of registration
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Jul 2024.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30717707Strauss VY, Shaw R, Virdee PS, Hurt CN, Ward E, Tranter B, Patel N, Bridgewater J, Parsons P, Radhakrishna G, O'Neill E, Sebag-Montefiore D, Hawkins M, Corrie PG, Maughan T, Mukherjee S. Study protocol: a multi-centre randomised study of induction chemotherapy followed by capecitabine +/- nelfinavir with high- or standard-dose radiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP-2). BMC Cancer. 2019 Feb 4;19(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12885-019-5307-z.
Related trials for Pancreatic Neoplasms (Locally Advanced Non-metastatic)
Recruiting
CREO - Microwave Ablation Feasibility Study
Pancreatic Cancer, Liver Cancer (Locally Advanced or Metastatic)
RecruitingPhase 1/2
VMD-928 Monotherapy and in Combination With Pembrolizumab to Treat TrkA Overexpression Driven Solid Tumors or Lymphoma
Head and Neck Carcinoma, Adenoid Cystic Carcinoma
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study to Find a Suitable Dose of ASP5834 in Adults With Solid Tumors
Solid Tumor, Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer
Active, not recruitingPhase 3
Testing Cabozantinib in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Neuroendocrine and Carcinoid Tumors
Functioning Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor, Intermediate Grade Lung Neuroendocrine Neoplasm
RecruitingPhase 2
A Study of HER3-DXd in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors
Advanced Solid Tumor, Melanoma
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Somnath Mukherjee, MD, FRCP, FRCR principal investigator
somnath.mukherjee@oncology.ox.ac.uk
23 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 1/2 study testing nab-paclitaxel, 60Gy in 30# and 50.4Gy in 28# in people with Pancreatic Neoplasms (Locally Advanced Non-metastatic), run by University of Oxford at 23 sites in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 15 inclusion and 22 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Jul 2024. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 23 sites in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this combined phase mean?
Phase 1 studies test a treatment in a small group of people for the first time or in a new way, mainly to check safety and find the right dose.
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Progression free survival (time frame: From date of registration until date of first documented progression or death ( if death occurred without progression), assessed up until last patient last visit (43 months).). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02024009, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 25 Jul 2024.