Cited by 238Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology ResearchAutophagy in Disease and TherapyPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment

Safety and biologic response of pre-operative autophagy inhibition in combination with gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

Open access
Boone, Brian A., Bahary, Nathan, Zureikat, Amer H, Moser, A. James, Normolle, Daniel P, Wu, Wen-Chi, Singhi, Aatur D., Bao, Phillip +6 more·2015·Annals of Surgical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose Autophagy is a cell survival mechanism that plays a critical role in pancreatic carcinogenesis. Murine studies have previously demonstrated that treatment with the late-autophagy inhibitor chloroquine in combination with chemotherapy limited tumor growth.Methods In this phase 1/2 trial, we examined treatment with hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) and gemcitabine for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, evaluated by Storer's dose escalation design. Secondary endpoints were CA 19-9 biomarker response, R0 resection rates, survival, and correlative studies of autophagy.Results Thirty-five patients were enrolled. There were no dose-limiting toxicities and no grade 4/5 events related to treatment. Nineteen patients (61 %) had a decrease in CA 19-9 after treatment. Twenty-nine patients (94 %) underwent surgical resection as scheduled, with a 77 % R0 resection rate. Median overall survival was 34.8 months (95 % confidence interval, 11.57 to not reached). Patients who had more than a 51 % increase in the autophagy marker LC3-II in circulating peripheral blood mononuclear cells had improvement in disease-free survival (15.03 vs. 6.9 months, p < 0.05) and overall survival (34.83 vs. 10.83 months, p < 0.05). No outcome differences were demonstrated in the 81 % of patients with abnormal p53 expression assessed by immunohistochemistry in the resected specimens.Conclusions Preoperative autophagy inhibition with HCQ plus gemcitabine is safe and well tolerated. Surrogate biomarker responses (CA 19-9) and surgical oncologic outcomes were encouraging. p53 status was not associated with adverse outcomes.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1245/s10434-015-4566-4

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Mitophagy is important in PDAC tumorigenesis in mice and organoid models.

    “Mitophagy, the selective engulfment and degradation of mitochondria through autophagy, has also been shown to be important in PDAC tumorigenesis in mice and organoid models211”

    From Pancreatic cancer: Advances and challenges (2023) · cites this paper as [211]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [21]Bao P Potter D Eisenberg DP Lenzner D Zeh HJ Lee KK Iii Validation of a prediction rule to maximize curative (R0) resection of early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma HPB (Oxford) 2009 11 7 606 11 20495714 PMC2785957
  2. [31]Bao P Potter D Eisenberg DP Lenzner D Zeh HJ Lee KK Iii Validation of a prediction rule to maximize curative (R0) resection of early-stage pancreatic adenocarcinoma HPB (Oxford) 2009 11 7 606 11 20495714 PMC2785957

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Boone, B. A., Bahary, N., Zureikat, A. H., Moser, A. J., Normolle, D. P., Wu, W.-C., Singhi, A. D., Bao, P., Bartlett, D. L., Liotta, L. A., Espina, V., Loughran, P., Lotze, M. T., & Zeh, H. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Pittsburgh (US)
  • Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center (US)
  • George Mason University (US)
Corresponding author
  • Lotze, Michael T.
  • Zeh, Herbert J.
Venue
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published
2015-04-24
Volume
22
Issue
13
Pages
4402-4410
ISSN
  • 1068-9265 (ISSN-L)
  • 1534-4681
OpenAlex
W2018872699
Cited by
234
References
52
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 24 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 23 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 27 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 2
FWCI
8.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Annals of Surgical Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (L30 CA170992, R01CA181450, P30CA047904, T32CA113263)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Pancreatic and Hepatic Oncology Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Autophagy in Disease and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Pancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Keywords
pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, autophagy inhibition, hydroxychloroquine, gemcitabine, neoadjuvant therapy, CA19-9, LC3-II, p53, R0 resection, overall survival, safety and tolerability, biomarker response
MeSH terms
Gemcitabine, Adenocarcinoma, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic, Autophagy, Deoxycytidine, Drug Therapy, Combination, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Hydroxychloroquine, Immunoenzyme Techniques, Male, Middle Aged, Neoplasm Staging, Pancreatic Neoplasms, Prognosis, Prospective Studies, Safety, Biomarkers, Survival Rate, CA-19-9 Antigen, Antirheumatic Agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review