Most pancreatic cancer resections are R1 resections

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine-based regimens improves the prognosis of node positive resectable pancreatic head cancer

The effectiveness of preoperative (neoadjuvant) chemotherapy (NAC) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unclear. The present study retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of NAC with gemcitabine (GEM)-based regimens or GEM monotherapy for resectable PDAC. Between 2006 and 2015, NAC with GEM was performed in 52 cases (head 31, and body and tail 21) and compared with 34 resection-only cases serving as controls (head 20, and body and tail 14). According to the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors guidelines, the treatment effect was a partial response in 5 cases, stable disease in 45 cases, and progressive disease in 2 cases. Maximum standardized uptake values and carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) values were significantly reduced after preoperative chemotherapy. Using the Evans grading system, the treatment effect was grade I in 31 patients, grade IIa in 8, and grade IIb in 3 cases. There were significant differences in the overall survival rate between the NAC and control groups, only in the patients with node-positive pancreatic head cancer. Significantly higher CA19-9 values in peripheral blood and higher lymph node metastasis and plexus invasion rates were observed in early-recurring cases within a year. The preoperative CA 19-9 cutoff value as an early recurrence risk factor was calculated as 30 U/ml in the NAC group and 88 U/ml in the control group. NAC with GEM prolonged survival in patients with node-positive pancreatic head cancer. High CA19-9 values before operation, lymph node metastases and plexus invasion were risk factors for early tumor recurrence after surgery. Preoperative chemotherapy would be necessary for resectable pancreatic head cancer as lymph node metastasis was observed in >60% with resectable PDAC. Moreover, if normalization of CA19-9 values is not achieved with NAC, extension of preoperative chemotherapy should be considered as for borderline resectable PDAC cases.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is recommended for patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). In this study, we compare survival outcomes of neoadjuvant therapy with upfront surgery.

METHODS

From January 2011 to June 2016, 1415 patients underwent treatments for pancreatic cancer in Samsung Medical Center. Among them, 112 (7.9%) patients were categorized as BRPC by the NCCN 2016 guideline. They were classified by type of initial treatments into neoadjuvant group (NA, N.=26) and upfront surgery group (US, N.=86).

RESULTS

The median survival duration of all patients was 18.3 months. Patients in the NA group had more T4 disease than those in the US group (38.5% in NA versus 15.1% in the US group; P=0.010). Arterial involvement was more frequent in the NA group (42.3% versus 15.1%; P=0.003). In the NA group, ten (38.5%) patients underwent surgery, and seven of them had complete R0 resection. In the US group, 83 (96.5%) patients received radical surgery, and 42 (48.8%) had R0 resection. In survival analysis according to intent to treat, the overall two-year survival rate was 51.1% in the US group and 36.7% in the NA group (P=0.001). However, among patients who underwent surgery (N.=96), the two-year overall survival rate was not significantly different between the two groups (P=0.089). According to involved vessels, the survival rate was not different between patients with arterial or both arterial and venous involvement and in patients with only venous involvement (P=0.649).

CONCLUSIONS

It is necessary to demonstrate the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy and to standardize the regimens through large-scale, multicenter, randomized controlled studies.

Beam direction arrangement using a superconducting rotating gantry in carbon ion treatment for pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVES

Carbon ion radiotherapy provides a concentrated dose distribution to the target and has several advantages over photon radiotherapy. This study aimed to evaluate the optimal beam direction in carbon ion pencil beam scanning and compare dose distributions between the rotating gantry system (RGS) and fixed-beam port system (FBPS).

METHODS

Patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were randomly selected. First, dose-volume parameters of 7-beam directions in the prone position were evaluated. Second, a composite plan developed using 4-beam directions in RGS was compared with that developed using FBPS, with a total prescribed dose of 55.2 Gy (relative biological effectiveness, RBE) in 12 fractions.

RESULTS

Target coverages in the composite plan did not widely differ. For the first and second segments of the duodenum, the mean dose of D2cc was not significantly changed (23.80 ± 11.90 Gy [RBE] and 25.63 ± 10.41 Gy [RBE] for RGS and FBPS, respectively). However, the dose-volume histogram curve in RGS showed a prominent dose reduction in the low-dose region. No significant differences were observed in the stomach, third and fourth segments of the duodenum, and spinal cord. The mean dose of the total kidney was similar between RGS and FBPS.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with that of FBPS, the 4-beam arrangement in the prone position using RGS provides comparable or superior dose distribution in the surrounding normal organ while achieving the same target coverage. In addition, RGS allows for single-patient positioning.

ADVANCES IN KNOWLEDGE

RGS is beneficial in delivering radiotherapy doses to the duodenum and allows for single-patient positioning and a simple planning process.

Management of pancreatic head adenocarcinoma: From where to where?

Pancreatic head adenocarcinoma (PHAC) is one of the most aggressive malignancies, and it has low long-term survival rates. Surgery is the only option for long-term survival. The difficulties associated with PHAC include higher frequencies of regional or distant lymph node metastases and vascular involvement, and positive resection margins in pancreatic and retroperitoneal tissues. Radical resections increase margin negativity and life expectancy; however, the extend of the surgery applied is controversial. Thus, western and eastern centers may use different approaches. Multiorgan, peripancreatic nerve plexus, and vascular resections have been discussed in relation to radical surgery for pancreatic cancer as have the roles of neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy regimens. Determining the appropriate limits for surgery, standardizing definitions and surgical techniques according to guidelines, and centralizing pancreatic surgery within high-volume institutions to reduce mortality and morbidity rates are among the most important issues to consider. In this review, we evaluate the basic concepts underlying and the roles of radical surgery for PHAC, and lymphadenectomy, nerve plexus, retroperitoneal tissue, vascular, and multivisceral resections, total pancreatectomy, and liver metastases are discussed.

Pancreatic cancer surgical management

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a dismal prognosis and surgery is the only chance for cure. However, only few of the patients have localized tumor eligible for curative complete resection. Preoperative management and well-staging of the disease are the cornerstone for appropriate surgery and major issues to define the best therapeutic strategy. This review focuses on the surgical and optimal perioperative management of PDAC and summarizes updates data on the subject.

Impact of resection margin status on recurrence and survival in pancreatic cancer surgery

BACKGROUND

The prognosis of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor and selection of patients for surgery is challenging. This study examined the impact of a positive resection margin (R1) on locoregional recurrence (LRR) and overall survival (OS); and also aimed to identified tumour characteristics and/or technical factors associated with a positive resection margin in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

Patients scheduled for pancreatic resection for PDAC between 2006 and 2016 were identified from an institutional database. The effect of resection margin status, patient characteristics and tumour characteristics on LRR, distant metastasis and OS was assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 322 patients underwent pancreatectomy for PDAC. A positive resection (R1) margin was found in 129 patients (40·1 per cent); this was associated with decreased OS compared with that in patients with an R0 margin (median 15 (95 per cent c.i. 13 to 17) versus 22 months; P < 0·001). R1 status was associated with reduced time to LRR (median 16 versus 36 (not estimated, n.e.) months; P = 0·002). Disease recurrence patterns were similar in the R1 and R0 groups. Risk factors for early recurrence were tumour stage, positive lymph nodes (N1) and perineural invasion. Among 100 patients with N0 disease, R1 status was associated with shorter OS compared with R0 resection (median 17 (10 to 24) versus 45 (n.e.) months; P = 0·002), whereas R status was not related to OS in 222 patients with N1 disease (median 14 (12 to 16) versus 17 (15 to 19) months after R1 and R0 resection respectively; P = 0·068).

CONCLUSION

Although pancreatic resection with a positive margin was associated with poor survival and early recurrence, particularly in patients with N1 disease, disease recurrence patterns were similar between R1 and R0 groups.

The Impact of Positive Resection Margins on Survival and Recurrence Following Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND

Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies.

METHODS

Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial.

RESULTS

There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1 mm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1 mm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.

Margin status and long-term prognosis of primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor after curative resection: Results from the US Neuroendocrine Tumor Study Group

BACKGROUND

The impact of margin status on resection of primary pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors has been poorly defined. The objectives of the present study were to determine the impact of margin status on long-term survival of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors after curative resection and evaluate the impact of reresection to obtain a microscopically negative margin.

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent resection for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors between 2000 and 2016 were identified at 8 hepatobiliary centers. Overall and recurrence-free survival were analyzed relative to surgical margin status using univariable and multivariable analyses.

RESULTS

Among 1,020 patients, 866 (84.9%) had an R0 (>1 mm margin) resection, whereas 154 (15.1%) had an R1 (≤1 mm margin) resection. R1 resection was associated with a worse recurrence-free survival (10-year recurrence-free survival, R1 47.3% vs R0 62.8%, hazard ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.7, P = .002); residual tumor at either the transection margin (R1t) or the mobilization margin (R1m) was associated with increased recurrence versus R0 (R1t versus R0: hazard ratio 1.8, 95% confidence interval 1.0-3.0, P = .033; R1m versus R0: hazard ratio 1.3, 95% confidence interval 1.0-1.7, P = .060). In contrast, margin status was not associated with overall survival (10-year overall survival, R1 71.1% vs R0 71.8%, P = .392). Intraoperatively, 539 (53.6%) patients had frozen section evaluation of the surgical margin; 49 (9.1%) patients had a positive margin on frozen section analysis; 38 of the 49 patients (77.6%) had reresection, and a final R0 (secondary R0) margin was achieved in 30 patients (78.9%). Extending resection to achieve an R0 status remained associated with worse overall survival (hazard ratio 3.1, 95% confidence interval 1.6-6.2, P = .001) and recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio 2.6, 95% confidence interval 1.4-5.0, P = .004) compared with primary R0 resection. On multivariable analyses, tumor-specific factors, such as cellular differentiation, perineural invasion, Ki-67 index, and major vascular invasion, rather than surgical margin, were associated with long-term outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Margin status was not associated with long-term survival. The reresection of an initially positive surgical margin to achieve a negative margin did not improve the outcome of patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Parenchymal-sparing pancreatic procedures for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors may be appropriate when feasible.

Prediction of Recurrence With KRAS Mutational Burden Using Ultrasensitive Digital Polymerase Chain Reaction of Radial Resection Margin of Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

Although complete surgical resection is the only curative method for pancreatic cancer, the radial resection margins of pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy specimens might be underevaluated.

METHODS

KRAS mutation was assessed with droplet digital polymerase chain reaction on cells collected from the radial resection margins of 81 patients, and the results were compared with those of conventional pathologic resection margin (pRM) evaluation.

RESULTS

KRAS mutation was detected in 76 patients (94%), and molecular resection margin (mRM) positivity defined by a KRAS mutation rate of 4.19% or greater was observed in 18 patients (22%). Patients with mRM-positive had significantly worse recurrence-free survival (RFS) than those with mRM-negative in entire groups (P = 0.008) and in subgroups without chemotherapy or radiation therapy (all, P < 0.001). When combined pRMs-mRMs were evaluated, patients with combined pRM-mRM-positive (either pRM- or mRM-positive) had significantly worse RFS than those with combined resection margin-negative (both pRM and mRM negative) by univariate (P = 0.002) and multivariate (P = 0.03) analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

KRAS mutational analysis with ultrasensitive droplet digital polymerase chain reaction of the radial resection margin in pancreatic cancer patients who underwent pylorus-preserving pancreaticoduodenectomy can provide more accurate information on RFS by using alone or in combination with conventional pRM evaluation, especially in patients without chemotherapy or radiation therapy.

Efficacy and safety of CT-guided high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy in primary and secondary malignancies of the pancreas

PURPOSE

To evaluate efficacy and safety of CT-guided iBT in patients with primary and secondary malignancies of the pancreas.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

13 patients with 13 lesions of the pancreatic corpus and tail were included: 8 secondary malignancies (metastatic lesions = ML) and 5 primary malignancies, including 3 primary tumors (PT) and 2 isolated locoregional recurrences (ILR) after surgical resection were treated with image-guided iBT using a 192iridium source (single fraction irradiation). Every 3 months after treatment clinical and imaging follow-up were conducted to evaluate efficacy. Peri- and postinterventional complications were assessed descriptively.

RESULTS

The median diameter of the gross tumor volume (GTV) was 3 cm (range 1-6.5 cm), treated with a median D100 (minimal enclosing tumor dose) of 15.3 Gy (range 9.2-25.4 Gy). Local tumor control (LTC) was 92.3% within a median follow-up period of 6.7 months (range 3.2-55.7 months). Cumulative median progression free survival (PFS) was 6.2 months (range 2.8-25.7 months; PFS of primary and secondary malignancies was 5.8 and 6.2 months, respectively). Cumulative median over all survival (OS) after iBT was 16.2 months (range 3.3-55.7 months; OS of primary and secondary malignancies was 7.4 months and 45.6 months, respectively). 1 patient developed mild acute pancreatits post iBT, spontanously resolved within 1 week. No severe adverse events (grade 3+) were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Image-guided iBT is a safe and particularly effective treatment in patients with primary and secondary malignancies of the pancreas and might provide a well-tolerated additional therapeutic option in the multidisciplinary management of selected patients.

Modeling the binding and diffusion of receptor-targeted nanoparticles topically applied on fresh tissue specimens

Nanoparticle (NP) contrast agents targeted to cancer biomarkers are increasingly being engineered for the early detection of cancer, guidance of therapy, and monitoring of response. There have been recent efforts to topically apply biomarker-targeted NPs on tissue surfaces to image the expression of cell-surface receptors over large surface areas as a means of evaluating tumor margins to guide wide local excision surgeries. However, diffusion and nonspecific binding of the NPs present challenges for relating NP retention on the tissue surface with the expression of cancer cell receptors. Paired-agent methods that employ a secondary 'control' NP to account for these nonspecific effects can improve cancer detection. Yet these paired-agent methods introduce multidimensional complexity (with tissue staining, rinsing, imaging, and data analysis protocols all being subject to alteration), and could be greatly simplified with accurate, predictive in silico models of NP binding and diffusion. Here, we outline and validate such a model to predict the diffusion, as well as specific and nonspecific binding, of targeted and control NPs topically applied on tissue surfaces. In order to inform the model, in vitro experiments were performed to determine relevant NP diffusion and binding rate constants in tissues. The predictive capacity of the model was validated by comparing simulated distributions of various sizes of NPs in comparison with experimental results. The regression of predicted and experimentally measured concentration-depth profiles yielded  <15% error (compared to ~70% error obtained using a previous model of NP diffusion and binding).

Pancreatoduodenectomy with artery-first approach

"Artery-first approach" encompasses different aspects for the surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer. It is a surgical technique or set of techniques which share in common the dissection of the main arterial vasculature involved in pancreatic cancer, before any irreversible surgical step is performed. On the other hand it represents the need for a meticulous dissection of the arterial planes and clearing of the retropancreatic tissue between the superior mesenteric artery, the common hepatic artery and portal vein in an attempt to achieve R0 resections. The recent expansion of this approach is based mainly on three factors: venous involvement should not be considered a contraindication for resection, most of the pancreatic resections performed with a standard procedure may be in fact non-oncological (R1) resections and the postero-medial or vascular margin is the most frequently invaded by the tumor. This review aimed to summarize and update the artery-first approach in pancreaticoduodenectomy.

A propensity score-matched analysis of robotic versus open pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer based on margin status

BACKGROUND

No study has shown the oncologic non-inferiority of robotic pancreatoduodenectomy (RPD) versus open pancreatoduodenectomy (OPD) for pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

This is a single institution propensity score matched study comparing RPD and ODP for resectable PC, based on factors predictive of R1 resection (≤ 1 mm). Only patients operated on after completion of the learning curve in both procedures and for whom circumferential margins were assessed according to the Leeds pathology protocol were included. The primary study endpoint was the rate of R1 resection. Secondary study endpoints were as follows: number of examined lymph nodes (N), rate of perioperative transfusions, percentage of patients receiving adjuvant therapies, occurrence of local recurrence, overall survival, disease-free survival, and sample size calculation for randomized controlled trials (RCT).

RESULTS

Factors associated with R1 resection were tumor diameter, number of positive N, N ratio, logarithm odds of positive N, and duodenal infiltration. The matching process identified 20 RPDs and 24 OPDs. All RPDs were completed robotically. R1 resection was identified in 11 RPDs (55.0%) and in 10 OPDs (41.7%) (p = 0.38). There was no difference in the rate of R1 at each margin as well as in the proportion of patients with multiple R1 margins. RPD and OPD were also equivalent with respect to all secondary study endpoints, with a trend towards lower rate of blood transfusions in RPD. Based on the figures presented herein, a non-inferiority RCT comparing RPD and OPD having the rate of R1 resection as the primary study endpoint requires 3355 pairs.

CONCLUSIONS

RPD and OPD achieved the same rate of R1 resections in resectable PC. RPD was also non-inferior to OPD with respect to all secondary study endpoints. Because of the high number of patients required to run a RCT, further assessment of RPD for PC would require the implementation of an international registry.

Neoadjuvant plus adjuvant or only adjuvant nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine for resectable pancreatic cancer - the NEONAX trial (AIO-PAK-0313), a prospective, randomized, controlled, phase II study of the AIO pancreatic cancer group

BACKGROUND

Even clearly resectable pancreatic cancer still has an unfavorable prognosis. Neoadjuvant or perioperative therapies might improve the prognosis of these patients. Thus, evaluation of perioperative chemotherapy in resectable pancreatic cancer in a prospective, randomized trial is warranted. A substantial improvement in overall survival of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer with FOLFIRINOX and nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine vs standard gemcitabine has been demonstrated in phase III-trials. Indeed nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine has a more favorable toxicity profile compared to the FOLFIRINOX protocol and appears applicable in a perioperative setting.

METHODS

NEONAX is an interventional, prospective, randomized, controlled, open label, two sided phase II study with an unconnected analysis of the results in both experimental arms against a fixed survival probability (38% at 18 months with adjuvant gemcitabine), NCT02047513. NEONAX will enroll 166 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (≤ cT3, N0 or N1, cM0) in two arms: Arm A (perioperative arm): 2 cycles nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2)/gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2, d1, 8 and 15 of an 28 day-cycle) followed by tumor surgery followed by 4 cycles nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine, Arm B (adjuvant arm): tumor surgery followed by 6 cycles nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine. The randomization (1:1) is eminent to avoid allocation bias between the groups. Randomization is stratified for tumor stage (ct1/2 vs. cT3) and lymph node status (cN0 vs. cN1). Primary objective is disease free survival (DFS) at 18 months after randomization. Key secondary objectives are 3-year overall survival (OS) rate and DFS rate, progression during neoadjuvant therapy, R0 and R1 resection rate, quality of life and correlation of DFS, OS and tumor regression with pharmacogenomic markers, tumor biomarkers and molecular analyses (ctDNA, transcriptome, miRNA-arrays). In addition, circulating tumor-DNA will be analyzed in patients with the best and the worst responses to the neoadjuvant treatment. The study was initiated in March 2015 in 26 centers for pancreatic surgery in Germany.

DISCUSSION

The NEONAX trial is an innovative study on resectable pancreatic cancer and currently one of the largest trials in this field of research. It addresses the question of the role of intensified perioperative treatment with nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine in resectable pancreatic cancers to improve disease-free survival and offers a unique potential for translational research.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT02047513, 08/13/2014.

Clinical significance of revised microscopic positive resection margin status in ductal adenocarcinoma of pancreatic head

Purpose

Recent studies have suggested microscopic positive resection margin should be revised according to the presence of tumor cells within 1mm of the margin surface in resected specimens of pancreatic cancer. However, the clinical meaning of this revised margin status for R1 resection margin was not fully clarified.

Methods

From July 2012 to December 2014, the medical records of 194 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head were analyzed retrospectively. They were divided into 3 groups on margin status; revised microscopic negative margin (rR0) – tumor exists more than 1 mm from surgical margin, revised microscopic positive margin (rR1) – tumor present within less than 1 mm from surgical margin, classic microscopic positive margin (cR1) – tumor is exposed to surgical margin.

Results

There were 76 rR0 (39.2%), 100 rR1 (51.5%), and 18 cR1 (9.3%). There was significant difference in disease-free survival rates between cR1 vs. rR1 (8.4 months vs. 24.0 months, P = 0.013). Margin status correlated with local recurrence rate (17.1% in rR0, 26.0% in rR1, and 44.4% in cR1, P = 0.048). There is significant difference in recurrence at tumor bed (11.8% in rR0 vs. 23.0 in rR1, P = 0.050). Of rR1, adjuvant treatment was found to be an independent risk factor for local recurrence (hazard ratio, 0.297; 95% confidence interval, 0.127–0.693, P = 0.005).

Conclusion

Revised R1 resection margin (rR1) affects recurrence at the tumor bed. Adjuvant treatment significantly reduced local recurrence of rR1. Accordingly, adjuvant chemoradiation for rR1 group should be taken into account.

Combined Systemic Chemotherapy and CT-Guided High-Dose-Rate Brachytherapy for Isolated Local Manifestation of Pancreatic Cancer after Surgical Resection

BACKGROUND

Prospective data on the optimal management of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) and isolated local manifestation (ILM) after surgery are lacking. Hence, no statements with respect to this entity have been released from most international guidelines including European Society for Medical Oncology, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, and American Society for Clinical Oncology.

METHODS

We report for the first time a case-series of 3 patients with PDA and ILM receiving combined systemic chemotherapy and CT-guided high-dose-rate interstitial brachytherapy (CT-HDRBT).

RESULTS

CT-HDRBT allowed in all patients with pronounced chemotherapy-induced side effects either a pause of cytostatic treatment or de-escalation to a "maintenance" therapy (dose reduction, interval prolongation, scheme modification with withdrawal of most toxic drugs).

CONCLUSION

Combining CT-HDRBT to systemic chemotherapy in patients with PDA and ILM is feasible and safe. As for patients with PDA and ILM no standard of care exists, designing an appropriate randomized prospective trial for this highly selected group of patients is challenging.

Current Therapeutic Options for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer remains the fourth most common cause of cancer-related mortality and is a major health threat. The majority of cases are diagnosed at advanced disease stages, limiting the chances of long-term survival. Several new therapeutic regimens have been introduced into routine clinical practice in recent years and a plethora of novel approaches is currently undergoing preclinical and early clinical evaluation. This review discusses the current standards of care for systemic therapy of pancreatic cancer and gives a brief outlook on ongoing clinical trials.

The role of hepatectomy for synchronous liver metastases from pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The role of hepatectomy for patients with liver metastases from ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (PLM) remains controversial. Therefore, the aim of our study was to examine the postoperative morbidity, mortality, and long-term survivals after liver resection for synchronous PLM.

METHODS

Clinicopathological data of patients who underwent hepatectomy for PLM between 1993 and 2015 were assessed. Major endpoint of this study was to identify predictors of overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

During the study period, 76 patients underwent resection for pancreatic cancer and concomitant hepatectomy for synchronous PLM. Pancreatoduodenectomy, distal pancreatectomy, and total pancreatectomy were performed in 67%, 25%, and 8% of the patients, respectively. The median PLM size was 1 (1-13) cm and 36% of patients had multiple PLM. The majority of patients (96%) underwent a minor liver resection. After a median follow-up time of 130 months, 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS rates were 41%, 13%, and 7%, respectively. Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were 50% and 5%, respectively. Preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy was administered to 5% and 72% of patients, respectively. In univariate analysis, type of pancreatic procedure (P = .020), resection and reconstruction of the superior mesenteric artery (P = .016), T4 stage (P = .086), R1 margin status at liver resection (P = .001), lymph node metastases (P = .016), poorly differentiated cancer (G3) (P = .037), no preoperative chemotherapy (P = .013), and no postoperative chemotherapy (P = .005) were significantly associated with worse OS. In the multivariate analysis, poorly differentiated cancer (G3) (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.87; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.08-3.24; P = .026), R1 margin status at liver resection (HR = 4.97; 95% CI = 1.46-16.86; P = .010), no preoperative chemotherapy (HR = 4.07; 95% CI = 1.40-11.83; P = .010), and no postoperative chemotherapy (HR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.06-3.29; P = .030) independently predicted worse OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Liver resection for PLM is feasible and safe and may be recommended within the framework of an individualized cancer therapy. Multimodal treatment strategy including perioperative chemotherapy and hepatectomy may provide prolonged survival in selected patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Outcomes after neoadjuvant treatment with gemcitabine and erlotinib followed by gemcitabine-erlotinib and radiotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer (GEMCAD 10-03 trial)

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients has shown promising results in non-randomized trials. This is a multi-institutional phase II trial of NAT in resectable PDAC patients.

METHODS

Patients with confirmed resectable PDAC after agreement by two expert radiologists were eligible. Patients received three cycles of GEM (1000 mg/m²/week) plus daily erlotinib (ERL) (100 mg/day). After re-staging, patients without progressive disease underwent 5 weeks of therapy with GEM (300 mg/m²/week), ERL 100 mg/day and concomitant radiotherapy (45 Gy). Efficacy was assessed using tumor regression grade (TRG) and resection margin status. Using a single-arm Simon's design, considering the therapy not useful if R0 < 40% and useful if the R0 > 70% (alpha 5%, beta 10%), 24 patients needed to be recruited. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01389440.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Adverse effects of NAT were mainly mild gastrointestinal disorders. Resectability rate was 76%, with a R0 rate of 63.1% among the resected patients. Median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 23.8 (95% CI 11.4-36.2) and 12.8 months (95% CI 8.6-17.1), respectively. R0 resection patients had better median OS, compared with patients with R1 resection or not resected (65.5 months vs. 15.5 months, p = 0.01). N0 rate among the resected patients was 63.1%, and showed a longer median OS (65.5 vs. 15.2 months, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study confirm promising oncologic results with NAT for patients with resectable PDAC. Therefore, the present trial supports the development of phase II randomized trials comparing NAT vs. upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer.

Vein resection in patients with adenocarcinoma of the head of pancreas adherent to the portomesenteric venous axis is beneficial despite a high rate of R1 resection

Backgrounds/Aims

En-bloc vein resection (VR) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) of the head of pancreas adherent to the portomesenteric axis benefits patients when the vein wall is not infiltrated by tumour and an R0 resection is achieved, albeit at the expense of greater morbidity and mortality.

Methods

A retrospective review of pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC over 6 years was conducted. Patients were divided into a standard resection group (Group SR) and simultaneous vein resection group (Group VR) and compared for outcome.

Results

The study group consisted of 41 patients (Group SR 15, Group VR 26). VR was performed by end-to-end reconstruction in 12 patients and with interposition grafts in 13 cases (autologous vein in 10, PTFE in 3). R1 resections occurred in 49% patients, with the superior mesenteric artery margin most commonly involved. Patients with Ishikawa grade III and IV vein involvement were more likely to carry a positive SMA margin (p=0.04). Involvement of the splenoportal junction was associated with a significantly greater risk of pancreatic transection margin involvement. No difference in morbidity was seen between the groups. Median survival in the entire group of patients was 17 months and did not vary significantly between the groups. The only significant predictor of survival was lymph node status.

Conclusions

Venous involvement by proximal PDAC is indicative of tumor location rather than tumor biology. VR improves outcomes in patients with tumor adhesion to the portomesenteric venous axis despite a high incidence of R1 resections and greater operative mortality.

Tumour origin and R1 rates in pancreatic resections: towards consilience in pathology reporting

To evaluate differences in the R1 rates of ampullary (AC), pancreatic (PC), and distal bile duct (DBD) cancers in pancreatoduodenectomies (PD) using standardised pathology assessment. Data of PD (2010-2011) analysed in accordance with the Royal College of Pathologists (UK) protocol, were retrieved. Clinicopathologic features, including frequency, topography, and mode of margin involvement in AC (n = 87), PC (n = 18), and DBD (n = 5) cancers were evaluated. The R1 rate was 7%, 67%, and 20% in the AC, PC, and DBD cancers (p < 0.001). Within the PC cohort, R1 rate was heterogeneous (chemo-naïve, 77%; post-neoadjuvant, 40%). Commonest involved margins were as follows: posterior in overall PD (35%), AC (43%), overall PC (33%), and post-neoadjuvant PC (100%); superior mesenteric artery margin in chemo-naïve PC (38%) and common bile duct margin in DBD (100%) cancers. In AC, majority (66%) of R1 were signet ring cell type. Indirect margin involvement due to tumour within lymph node, perineural sheath or lymphovascular space was observed in 26% cases, and altered R1 rate in AC, PC, and DBD cohorts by 1%, 12%, and 0%, respectively. Although not statistically significant, patients with R1 had lower disease-free survival than those with R0 (mean, 25.4 months versus 44.4 months). Tumour origin impacts R1 data in PD necessitating its accurate classification by pathologists. Indirect involvement, histology, and neoadjuvant therapy influence the R1 rate, albeit in a minority of cases. Generating cogent R1 data based on standardised pathology reporting is the foremost need of the hour.

Association Between Hepatitis B Infection and Pancreatic Cancer: A Population-Based Analysis in the United States

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to assess the role of hepatitis B (HepB) infection in the causation of pancreatic cancer and the predictors of pancreatic cancer and mortality.

METHODS

We identified pancreatic cancer patients 11 to 70 years of age from the 2013-2014 National Inpatient Sample. Pearson χ test and Student's t-test were used for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. We assessed the association of HepB and pancreatic cancer and the independent mortality predictors by multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of 69,210 pancreatic cancer patients, 175 patients with a history of HepB and 69,035 patients without a history of HepB were identified. Compared with the pancreatic cancer-non-HepB group, the pancreatic cancer-HepB group consisted more of younger (mean, 60.4 [standard deviation, 7.4] years vs 68.2 [standard deviation, 12.1] years), male, black, and Asian patients with low household income and nonelective admissions. The odds of developing pancreatic cancer among the HepB patients were significantly higher (adjusted odds ratio, 1.24; 95% confidence interval, 1.056-1.449; P = 0.008). Black race, age ≥ 65 years, and male sex demonstrated greater odds of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

This study concluded up to a 24% increased likelihood of pancreatic cancer among the HepB patients. Blacks showed greater odds of pancreatic cancer and related mortality.

Pathologic Evaluation of Surgical Margins in Pancreatic Cancer Specimens Using Color Coding With Tissue Marking Dyes

OBJECTIVES

Processing of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens is not standardized; the clinical impact of pathologic surgical margins remains controversial. We used the color-coding method using tissue-marking dyes to evaluate margin status of resected specimens to assess its association with postoperative recurrence.

METHODS

We developed a unified processing approach to assess pancreatoduodenectomy specimens. Five surgical margins of resected pancreatic specimens were marked with 5 colors. Microscopic resection margin distance (RMD) from margin closest to the tumor was evaluated for each surgical margin. Forty patients assessed using nonunified protocols, and 98 patients assessed using unified protocols were included.

RESULTS

The frequency of tumors with RMD of 1 mm or less in posterior margin was significantly lower and that in portal vein/superior mesenteric vein margin was significantly higher in unified protocol group than in nonunified protocol group (P < 0.001). In unified protocol group, tumors with RMD of 1 mm or less correlated with locoregional recurrence (P = 0.025) and recurrence-free survival (P = 0.030). Multivariate analysis revealed that tumor size and lymph node metastasis were independent indicators for disease recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Resection margin distance of 1 mm or less was a predictor for disease recurrence, particularly for locoregional recurrence. Early detection of small-sized tumors without lymph node metastasis is necessary for improved clinical outcomes in pancreas cancers.

Image-Guided Surgery in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: First Results of a Clinical Trial Using SGM-101, a Novel Carcinoembryonic Antigen-Targeting, Near-Infrared Fluorescent Agent

Background

Near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence is a promising novel imaging technique that can aid in intraoperative demarcation of pancreatic cancer (PDAC) and thus increase radical resection rates. This study investigated SGM-101, a novel, fluorescent-labeled anti-carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) antibody. The phase 1 study aimed to assess the tolerability and feasibility of intraoperative fluorescence tumor imaging using SGM-101 in patients undergoing a surgical exploration for PDAC.

Methods

At least 48 h before undergoing surgery for PDAC, 12 patients were injected intravenously with 5, 7.5, or 10 mg of SGM-101. Tolerability assessments were performed at regular intervals after dosing. The surgical field was imaged using the Quest NIR imaging system. Concordance between fluorescence and tumor presence on histopathology was studied.

Results

In this study, SGM-101 specifically accumulated in CEA-expressing primary tumors and peritoneal and liver metastases, allowing real-time intraoperative fluorescence imaging. The mean tumor-to-background ratio (TBR) was 1.6 for primary tumors and 1.7 for metastatic lesions. One false-positive lesion was detected (CEA-expressing intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm). False-negativity was seen twice as a consequence of overlying blood or tissue that blocked the fluorescent signal.

Conclusion

The use of a fluorescent-labeled anti-CEA antibody was safe and feasible for the intraoperative detection of both primary PDAC and metastases. These results warrant further research to determine the impact of this technique on clinical decision making and overall survival.

Resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma neo-adjuvant FOLF(IRIN)OX-based chemotherapy - a multicenter, non-comparative, randomized, phase II trial (PANACHE01-PRODIGE48 study)

BACKGROUND

At time of diagnosis, less than 10% of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are considered to be immediately operable (i.e. resectable). Considering their poor overall survival (OS), only tumours without vascular invasion (NCCN 2017) should be considered for resection, i.e. those for which resection with disease-free margins (R0) is theoretically possible in absence of presurgery treatment. With regard to high R1 rates and undetectable locoregional and/or metastatic spreading prior to surgery explain (at least in part) the observed 1-year relapse and mortality rates of 50 and 25%, respectively. Today, upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy is the reference treatment in Europe. The main limitation of the adjuvant approach is the low rate of completion of the full therapeutic sequence. Indeed, only 47 to 60% patients received any adjuvant therapy after resection compared to more than 75% for neoadjuvant therapy. No previous prospective study has compared this approach to a neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX or FOLFOX chemotherapy for resectable PDAC.

METHODS

PANACHE01-PRODIGE48 is a prospective multicentre controlled randomized non comparative Phase II trial, evaluating the safety and efficacy of two regimens of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (4 cycles of mFOLFIRINOX or FOLFOX) relative to the current reference treatment (surgery and then adjuvant chemotherapy) in patients with resectable PDAC. The main co-primary endpoints are OS rate at 12 months and the rate of patients undergoing the full therapeutic sequence.

DISCUSSION

The "ideal" cancer treatment for resectable PDAC would have the following characteristics: administration to the highest possible proportion of patients, ability to identify fast-progressing patients (i.e. poor candidates for surgery), a low rate of R1 resections (through optimisation of local disease control), and an acceptable toxicity profile. The neoadjuvant approach may meet all these criteria. With respect to published data on the efficacy of FOLFOX and mFOLFIRINOX, these two regimens are potential candidates for neoadjuvant use in the aim to optimising oncological outcomes in resectable PDAC.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT02959879 . Trial registration date: November 9, 2016.

Intra-Operative Frozen Section Histology of the Pancreatic Resection Margins and Clinical Outcome of Patients with Adenocarcinoma of the Head of the Pancreas Undergoing Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent frozen section and paraffin section histology of the surgical resection margins during pancreaticoduodenectomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS Frozen section and routine paraffin section histopathology were performed using the following categories: R0 (no tumor cells at the surgical resection margin), R1 (tumor cells at, or within 1 mm, of the surgical resection margin), and R2 (tumor seen macroscopically at the surgical resection margin). R1 and R2 patients underwent additional resection to achieve R0. RESULTS Of 346 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, frozen section histology showed positive resection margins in 22 patients (9.2%) and paraffin section histology was positive in 20 patients (8.4%). The OS was nine months in frozen section-positive patients and 20 months in frozen section-negative patients (p=0.001). The OS rates were significantly different between the paraffin section-positive and paraffin section-negative patients (11 months vs. 21 months) (p=0.001). Univariate and multivariate analysis showed that increased tumor size, high tumor grade, lymph node metastases, a positive superior mesenteric artery and retroperitoneal margin, and a positive resection margin on frozen section were significantly correlated with reduced OS (p<0.05). Twenty-two patients with positive resection margins on frozen section histology underwent further resection; R0 was achieved in 14 patients, with no significant difference in OS. CONCLUSIONS For patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic carcinoma with positive resection margins on frozen section, further surgical resection to achieve R0 had no significant positive impact on OS.

Validation of prognostic risk scores for patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

A better stratification of patients into risk groups might help to select patients who might benefit from more aggressive therapy. The aim of this study was to validate five prognostic scores in patients resected for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Included were 307 PDAC patients who underwent resection with curative intent. Five clinical risk scores were selected and applied to our study population. Survival analyses were carried out using univariate and multivariate proportional hazards regression.

RESULTS

Prognostic stratification was strong for the Heidelberg score (p < 0.001) and the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) nomogram (p = 0.001) and moderate for the Botsis score (p = 0.033). There was no significant prognostic value for the Early Mortality Risk Score (p = 0.126) and McGill Brisbane Symptom Score (p = 0.133). Positive resection margin (HR 1.53, 95% CI 1.08-2.16) and pain [pain (HR 1.40, CI 1.03-1.91), back pain (HR 1.67, 95% CI 1.08-2.57)] were independent prognostic factors on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The Heidelberg score and MSKCC nomogram provided adequate risk stratification in our independent study cohort. Further studies in independent patient cohorts are required to achieve higher levels of validation.

The development of fluorescence guided surgery for pancreatic cancer: from bench to clinic

INTRODUCTION

Surgeons face major challenges in achieving curative R0 resection for pancreatic cancers. When the lesion is localized, they must appropriately visualize the tumor, determine appropriate resection margins, and ensure complete tumor clearance. Real-time surgical navigation using fluorescence-guidance has enhanced the ability of surgeons to see the tumor and has the potential to assist in achieving more oncologically complete resections. When there is metastatic disease, fluorescence enhancement can help detect these lesions and prevent unnecessary and futile surgeries. Areas covered: This article reviews different approaches for delivery of a fluorescence signal, their pre-clinical and clinical developments for fluorescence guided surgery, the advantages/challenges of each, and their potential for advancements in the future. Expert commentary: A variety of molecular imaging techniques are available for delivering tumor-specific fluorescence signals. Significant advancements have been made in the past 10 years due to the large body of literature on targeted therapies and this has translated into rapid developments of tumor-specific probes.

Chronologic changes in clinical and survival features of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma since 2000: A single-center experience with 2,029 patients

BACKGROUND

To identify chronologic changes in clinical and survival features of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma based on diagnosis and treatment strategy development since 2000.

METHODS

Among 2,029 patients enrolled in this study, 746 and 1,283 were treated between 2000 and 2009 (group 1) and between 2010 and 2016 (group 2), respectively. We used patient clinicopathologic, biologic, and molecular factors to assess the prognostic factors.

RESULTS

Group 2 had a better survival outcome than group 1 (median survival time: 24.9 versus 18.4 months; 5-year survival rate: 27.6% versus 22.3%). The tendency for early diagnosis (lower CA19-9 levels, smaller size, and earlier T stage), use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, decreased morbidity, early recovery (lesser hospital stay and more minimally invasive surgery), and standardization of surgical techniques appeared to improve patient survival. Multivariable analysis for prognosis revealed that tumor biologic factors (increased preoperative serum CA19-9 level, tumor size, tumor differentiation, N stage, and presence of lymphovascular invasion), operational factors (status of the resection margin, type of operation, and year of operation), and genetic factors (K-ras mutations) correlated with patient survival.

CONCLUSION

Early diagnosis and combined efforts, such as neoadjuvant chemotherapy and an established system of patient care, have gradually enhanced patient survival after operative resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Hence, multiplex prognostic parameters could provide additional information for improved prognostic estimation of pancreatic cancer exhibiting heterogeneous results.

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Staging in the Era of Preoperative Chemotherapy and Radiation Therapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) remains among the most challenging malignancies to treat. At diagnosis, the tumor often already extends beyond the confines of the pancreas, spreading to an extent such that primary surgery with curative intent is very rarely feasible. Considerable momentum is now being given to a treatment strategy involving neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemotherapy and radiation therapy in patients with nonmetastatic PDA. The main advantage of this strategy is better selection of patients likely to benefit from curative-intent surgery through the achievement of negative resection margins. Patients with rapidly progressive disease are identified and are spared ineffective surgery with its attendant morbidity. Neoadjuvant therapy can downstage tumors classified as locally advanced at initial imaging studies to resectable tumors. However, the imaging study evaluation of the response to neoadjuvant therapy is extremely complex. Thus, the diagnostic performance of imaging studies is not sufficient to ensure the accurate selection of patients in whom negative-margin resection is likely to be achieved. More specifically, standard criteria for predicting vascular invasion, based on the amount of tumor-vessel contact, are not valid after neoadjuvant therapy. ^©RSNA, 2018.

Routine portal vein resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma shows no benefit in overall survival

BACKGROUND

Extended pancreatic resections including resections of the portal (PV) may nowadays be performed safely. Limitations in distinguishing tumor involvement from inflammatory adhesions however lead to portal vein resections (PVR) without evidence of tumor infiltration in the final histopathological examination. The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of these "false negative" resections on operative outcome and long-term survival.

METHODS

40 patients who underwent pancreatic resection with PVR for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) without tumor infiltration of the PV (PVR-group) were identified. In a 1:3 match these patients were compared to 120 patients after standard pancreatic resection without PVR (SPR-group) with regard to operative outcome and overall survival.

RESULTS

Survival analysis revealed that median survival was significantly shorter in the PVR group (311 days) as compared to the SPR group (558 days), (p = 0.0011, hazard ratio 1.98, 95% CI: 1.31-2.98). Also postoperative complications ≥ Clavien III occurred significantly more often in the PVR group (37.5% vs. 20.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

Radical resection affords the best chance for long-term survival in patients with PA. Based on the results of this study a routine resection of the PV as recently proposed may however not be recommended.

Validation of at least 1 mm as cut-off for resection margins for pancreatic adenocarcinoma of the body and tail

BACKGROUND

The definition of resection margin (R) status in pancreatic cancer is under debate. Although a margin of at least 1 mm is an independent predictor of survival after resection for pancreatic head cancer, its relevance to pancreatic body and tail cancers remains unclear. This study aimed to validate R status based on a 1-mm tumour-free margin as a prognostic factor for resected adenocarcinoma involving the pancreatic body and tail.

METHODS

Patients who underwent distal or total pancreatectomy for adenocarcinomas of the pancreatic body and tail between January 2006 and December 2014 were identified from a prospective database. Resection margins were evaluated using a predefined cut-off of 1 mm. Rates of R0, R1 with invasion within 1 mm of the margin (R1 less than 1 mm), and R1 with direct invasion of the resection margin (R1 direct) were determined, and overall survival in each group assessed by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of survival.

RESULTS

R0 resection was achieved in 107 (23·5 per cent) and R1 in 348 (76·5 per cent) of 455 patients. Among R1 resections, invasion within 1 mm of the margin was found in 104 (22·9 per cent) and direct invasion in 244 (53·6 per cent). The R0 rate was 28·9 per cent after distal and 18·6 per cent after total pancreatectomy. In the total cohort, median survival times for patients with R0, R1 (less than 1 mm) and R1 (direct) status were 62·4, 24·6 and 17·2 months respectively, with 5-year survival rates of 52·6, 16·8 and 13·0 per cent (P < 0·001). In patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy, respective median survival times were 68·6, 32·8 and 21·4 months, with 5-year survival rates of 56, 22 and 16·0 per cent (P < 0·001). In multivariable analysis, R status was independently associated with survival.

CONCLUSION

A cut-off of at least 1 mm for evaluation of resection margins is an independent determinant of survival after resection of adenocarcinomas of the pancreatic body and tail.

European evidence-based guidelines on pancreatic cystic neoplasms

Evidence-based guidelines on the management of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCN) are lacking. This guideline is a joint initiative of the European Study Group on Cystic Tumours of the Pancreas, United European Gastroenterology, European Pancreatic Club, European-African Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, European Digestive Surgery, and the European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy. It replaces the 2013 European consensus statement guidelines on PCN. European and non-European experts performed systematic reviews and used GRADE methodology to answer relevant clinical questions on nine topics (biomarkers, radiology, endoscopy, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN), mucinous cystic neoplasm (MCN), serous cystic neoplasm, rare cysts, (neo)adjuvant treatment, and pathology). Recommendations include conservative management, relative and absolute indications for surgery. A conservative approach is recommended for asymptomatic MCN and IPMN measuring <40 mm without an enhancing nodule. Relative indications for surgery in IPMN include a main pancreatic duct (MPD) diameter between 5 and 9.9 mm or a cyst diameter ≥40 mm. Absolute indications for surgery in IPMN, due to the high-risk of malignant transformation, include jaundice, an enhancing mural nodule >5 mm, and MPD diameter >10 mm. Lifelong follow-up of IPMN is recommended in patients who are fit for surgery. The European evidence-based guidelines on PCN aim to improve the diagnosis and management of PCN.

Pancreatic cancer cell detection by targeted lipid microbubbles and multiphoton imaging

Surgical resection of pancreatic cancer represents the only chance of cure and long-term survival in this common disease. Unfortunately, determination of a cancer-free margin at surgery is based on one or two tiny frozen section biopsies, which is far from ideal. Not surprisingly, cancer is usually left behind and is responsible for metastatic disease. We demonstrate a method of receptor-targeted imaging using peptide ligands, lipid microbubbles, and multiphoton microscopy that could lead to a fast and accurate way of examining the entire cut surface during surgery. Using a plectin-targeted microbubble, we performed a blinded in-vitro study to demonstrate avid binding of targeted microbubbles to pancreatic cancer cells but not noncancerous cell lines. Further work should lead to a much-needed point-of-care diagnostic test for determining clean margins in oncologic surgery.

Management of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

With the rapid development of imaging modalities and surgical techniques, the clinical entity representing tumors that are intermediate between resectable and unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma has been identified has been termed "borderline resectable" (BR). These tumors are generally amenable for resection but portend an increased risk for positive margins after surgery and commonly necessitate vascular resection and reconstruction. Although there is a lack of consensus regarding the appropriate definition of what constitutes a BR pancreatic tumor, it has been demonstrated that this intermediate category carries a particular prognosis that is in between resectable and unresectable disease. In order to downstage the tumor and increase the probability of clear surgical margins, neoadjuvant therapy is being increasingly utilized and studied. There is a lack of high-level evidence to establish the optimal treatment regimen for BR tumors. When resection with negative margins is achieved after neoadjuvant therapy, the prognosis for BR tumors approaches and even exceeds that for resectable disease. This review presents the current definitions, different treatment approaches, and the clinical outcomes of BR pancreatic cancer.

Clinical significance of defining borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

Since the introduction of the concept of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC), various definitions of this disease entity have been suggested. However, there are several obstacles in defining this disease category. The current diagnostic criteria of BRPC mainly focuses on its expanded 'technical resectability'; however, they are difficult to interpret because of their ambiguity using potential subjective or arbitrary terminology, In addition, limitations in current imaging technology and a lack of evidence in radiological-pathological-clinical correlation make it difficult to refine the criteria. On the other hand, neoadjuvant treatment is usually applied to increase the R0 resection rate of BRPC focusing on the 'oncological curability'. However, evidence is needed concerning the effect of neoadjuvant treatment by quality-controlled prospective randomized clinical trials based on a standardized radiologic and pathologic reporting system. In conclusion, there are two aspects in the current concept of BRPC, which are technical resectability and oncological curability. Although the recent evolution of surgical techniques is expanding the scope of technical resectability, it should not be overlooked that the disease entity must be defined based on the evidence of oncological curability.

Resection of Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer without Regression of Arterial Encasement After Modern-Era Neoadjuvant Therapy

INTRODUCTION

Modern-era systemic therapy for locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (LAPC) offers improved survival relative to historical regimens but not necessarily improved radiographic downstaging to allow more patients to undergo resection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the survival, progression, and pathologic outcomes after resection of LAPC that did not regress from > 180 degrees arterial encasement after neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Sixty-one LAPC patients were brought to the operating room after neoadjuvant therapy for NCCN-defined unresectable pancreatic cancer between 2012 and 2017. Pts were explored with intent of pancreatectomy and irreversible electroporation for margin extension; 5 (8%) had metastatic lesions on exploratory laparoscopy and were excluded from analyses. Imaging was re-examined to confirm LAPC prior to surgery. Data were analyzed from a prospective pancreatic cancer database.

RESULTS

Patients had arterial involvement of the celiac axis (37.5%) and/or superior mesenteric artery (42.9%) and/or an extended length of the common hepatic (n = 44.6%) artery. Twenty-nine males and 27 females, median 65 years of age, received neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based (58.9%) or FOLFIRINOX (35.7%) chemotherapy and stereotactic body (42.9%) or intensity-modulated (51.8%) radiation therapy. Median months from initiation of neoadjuvant therapy to surgery was 7.5. Sixty-one percent underwent Whipple, 21% distal, and 18% modified Appleby procedures; 57% patients underwent venous reconstruction. Ninety-day mortality was 2%. An R0 margin was achieved in 80%, and 53% were N0. Median overall and progression-free survival was 18.5 (95%CI 12.27-32.33) and 8.5 months (95%CI 6.0-15.0), respectively. One- and 3-year survival from surgery was 68.5% (95%CI 53.0-79.7) and 39.0% (95%CI 23.7-53.8), respectively.

CONCLUSION

With modern-era neoadjuvant therapy, R0 resections can be achieved in a majority of non-metastatic patients with locally advanced, unresectable disease based on cross-sectional imaging.

Histologic Tumor Grade and Preoperative Bilary Drainage are the Unique Independent Prognostic Factors of Survival in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Patients After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal types of cancer; most patients die during the first 6 months after diagnosis. With a 5% 5-year survival rate, is the fourth leading cause of cancer death in developed countries. In this regard, several clinical, histopathologic and biological characteristics of the disease favoring long-term survival after pancreaticoduodenectomy have been reported to be significant prognostic factors. Despite the availability of this information, there is no consensus about the different prognostic factors reported in the literature, probably due to variations in patient selection, methods, and sample size studied. The aim of this study was to identify the clinical and pathologic features associated to prognosis of the disease after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The clinical and pathologic data from 78 patients who underwent a potentially curative resection for PDAC at our institution between 2003 and 2014 were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

Overall, high-grade PDAC cases showed larger tumor size (P=0.009) and a higher frequency of deaths in association with a nonsignificantly shortened patient overall survival (median of 12.5 vs. 21.7 mo; P=0.065) as compared with low-grade PDAC patients. High histologic grade (P=0.013), preoperative drainage on the main bile duct (P=0.014) and absence of adjuvant therapy (P=0.035) were associated with a significantly poorer outcome. Overall survival multivariate analysis showed histologic grade (P=0.019) and bile duct preoperative drainage (P=0.016) as the sole independent variables predicting an adverse outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that histologic tumor grade and preoperative biliary drainage are the only significant independent prognostic factors in PDAC patients after pancreatectomy.

Value of surgical resection and timing of therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer at high risk for positive margins

Background

Surgical resection remains the best chance at long-term survival in pancreatic cancer, though margin-positive resections are associated with diminished survival. We examined the effect of margin-positive resection on survival, as well as the role and timing of additional therapies through the National Cancer Database (NCDB).

Patients and methods

Patients with stage IIA–III pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed from 2004 to 2013 were identified in NCDB. Survival was compared using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards modelling for patients who underwent surgery with negative (R0), microscopically positive (R1) and macroscopically positive (R2) margins or non-surgical treatment. We further analysed patients by margin status, timing of additional therapy (neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) vs adjuvant therapy (AT) vs none) and clinical stage.

Results

We analysed 44 852 patients. Median survival (MS) for patients who did not undergo surgery was 10.3 months, compared with 19.7 months for R0 (P<0.001), 14.3 months for R1 (P<0.001) and 9.8 months (P=0.07) for R2 resections. NAT (MS 23.2 months) was associated with improved survival compared with AT (MS 21.5 months) in negative-margin patients and equivalent (MS 17.6 months) to AT (MS 16.8 months) in positive-margin patients. Survival for stage III NAT positive-margin patients (MS 19.8 months) was equivalent to AT after negative margins (MS 18.4 months, P=1.00). Improved R0 rates were seen with NAT (88% vs 81%, P<0.001), especially in stage III patients (85% vs 59%, P<0.001).

Conclusion

R1 resections portend poorer survival than R0 but do not negate the benefit of surgery when additional therapy is given. NAT was associated with improved R0 rates and improved survival for stage III positive-margin patients.

Multicolour versus monocolour inking specimens after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer: A single centre prospective randomised clinical trial

BACKGROUND

R status represents an important prognostic factors in periampullary cancers. Thus, it is useful to verify if it can be influenced by different techniques of margination.

METHODS

Single-centre, randomised clinical trial of patients affected by periampullary cancer who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomies which included two different types of margination: arm A (multicolour inking) and arm B (monocolour inking). The primary endpoint was the overall R1 resection rate and its difference between the two arms. The secondary endpoints were the R1 resection rate in each margin and its difference between the two arms, and the impact of margin status on survival.

RESULTS

Fifty patients were randomised, 41 analysed: 22 in arm A, 19 arm B. The overall R1 status was 61%, without significant differences between the two arms. The margin most commonly involved was the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) (36.6%). A trend in favour of arm B was shown for the superior mesenteric artery margin (arm A = 22.7% versus arm B = 52.6%; P = 0.060). The anterior surface (P = 0.015), SMA (P = 0.047) and pancreatic remnant (P = 0.018) margins significantly influenced disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

The R status was not influenced by different techniques of margination using a standardised pathological protocol. The SMA margin seemed to be the most important margin for evaluating both R status and disease-free survival.

Pathologic assessment of gastrointestinal tract and pancreatic carcinoma after neoadjuvant therapy

Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly used to treat patients with a wide variety of malignancies. Histologic evaluation of treated specimens provides important prognostic information and may guide subsequent chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant therapy is commonly employed in the treatment of locally advanced rectal adenocarcinoma, hepatic colorectal metastases, esophageal/esophagogastric junction carcinoma, and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Numerous tumor regression schemes have been used in these tumors and standardized approaches to evaluate these specimens are needed. In this review, the various tumor regression scoring systems that have been used in these organs are described and their associations with clinical outcomes are discussed. Recommendations regarding how to handle and report the histologic findings in these resections specimens are provided.

Clinical impact of margin status on survival and recurrence pattern after curative-intent surgery for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

The definition of R0 resection for invasive pancreatic ductal carcinoma (IPDC) is important. However, there are different definitions among several countries in the world.

METHODS

From 2001 to 2015, 100 consecutive patients with IPDC who underwent pancreatic resection in our hospital were enrolled. We compared survival and recurrence patterns between the R0 group and R1 group based on the UICC (Union for International Cancer Control) classification (current-R0 vs. current-R1) and based on our revised classification, which defines R0 as a surgical margin of >1 mm (revised-R0 vs. revised-R1).

RESULTS

The 100 patients comprised 58 males and 42 females, and their median age was 70 [32-87]. There were 84 patients in the current-R0 group and 43 in the revised-R0 group. There was no difference in overall survival (OS) or recurrence-free survival (RFS) between the current-R0 group and current-R1 group. However, there was a tendency toward a higher OS rate in the revised-R0 than revised-R1 group (log-rank p = 0.065), and RFS was significantly better in the revised-R0 than revised-R1 group (log-rank p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in the recurrence patterns between the current-R0 and current-R1 groups. In contrast, the local recurrence rate was significantly lower in the revised-R0 than revised-R1 group (21% vs. 42%, respectively; p = 0.026).

CONCLUSION

The revised classification of surgical resection may be more useful than the current UICC classification for prediction of prognosis and local recurrence of IPDC.

The role of irreversible electroporation (IRE) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review of safety and efficacy

OBJECTIVES

Irreversible electroporation (IRE) is a new modality for tumor ablation. Electrodes are placed around the tumor, and a pulsed, direct current with a field strength of 2000 V/cm is delivered. The direct current drives cells into apoptosis and cell death without causing significant heating of the tissues, which spares the extracellular matrix and proteins. The purpose of this review was to evaluate current experience of IRE for the ablation of pancreatic cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We searched PubMed for all studies of IRE in human pancreatic cancer in English reporting at least 10 patients.

RESULTS

The search yielded 10 studies, comprising a total of 446 patients. Percutaneous IRE was done in 142 patients, while 304 patients were treated during laparotomy. Tumor sizes ranged from median 2.8 to 4.5 cm. Post-procedural complications occurred in 35% of patients, most of them were less severe. Nine patients (2.0%) died after the procedure. The technical success rate was 85-100%. The median recurrence-free survival was 2.7-12.4 months after IRE treatment. The median overall survival was 7-23 months postoperatively. The longest overall survival was noted when IRE was used in conjunction with pancreatic resection.

CONCLUSIONS

IRE seems feasible and safe with a low post-procedural mortality. Further efforts are needed to address patient selection and efficacy of IRE, as well as the use of IRE for 'margin accentuation' during surgical resection.

Total mesopancreas excision for the treatment of pancreatic head cancer

Mesopancreas is a controversial structure. This study aimed to explore the anatomical characteristics of the mesopancreas, define the range of the total mesopancreas excision (TMpE), and evaluate the feasibility, safety and effectivity of TMpE in the treatment of pancreatic head cancer. The clinical and pathological data of 58 consecutive patients undergoing TMpE for pancreatic head carcinoma from January 2013 to December 2015 were analyzed prospectively. The perioperative morbidity, mortality and clinical outcomes of patients undergoing TMpE were compared with the patients undergoing conventional pancreaticoduodenectomy. The mesopancreas was located in the retropancreatic area, extending from the head, neck, and uncinated process of pancreas to the aorto-caval groove, in which there were loose areolar tissue, adipose tissue, nerve plexus, lymphatic and capillaries. We observed significantly higher R0 rate (94.8% vs. 81.4%, P=0.035), more lymph nodes (16.2 vs. 11.4, P=0.000), lower total and local recurrence rate (half-year local recurrence rate 7.8% vs. 23.7%, P=0.036, one-year 18.2% vs. 39.5%, P=0.018) and longer disease-free survival (16.9 vs. 13.4 months, P=0.044) in TMpE group than in control group. In conclusion, mesopancreas is different from mesorectum because there is no fascial envelop or anatomical boundary in this area. TMpE could be safely and feasibly performed for the treatment of pancreatic head cancer to increase the R0 resection rate and improve the clinical outcomes.

The DPC4/SMAD4 genetic status determines recurrence patterns and treatment outcomes in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A prospective cohort study

Objectives

The objective of this study was to investigate the role of genetic status of DPC4 in recurrence patterns of resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

Between April 2004 and December 2011, data on patients undergoing surgical resection for PDAC were reviewed. Genetic status of DPC4 was determined and correlated to recurrence patterns and clinical outcomes.

Results

Analysis of 641 patients revealed that genetic status of DPC4 was associated with overall survival and was highly correlated with recurrence patterns, as inactivation of the DPC4 gene was the strongest predictor of metastatic recurrence (odds ratio = 4.28). Treatment modalities for recurrent PDAC included chemotherapy alone and concurrent chemotherapy along with local control. For both locoregional and metastatic recurrence, local control resulted in improved survival; however, for groups subdivided according to recurrence patterns and genetic status of DPC4, local control contributed to improved survival in locoregional recurrences of patients with expressed DPC4, while chemotherapy alone was sufficient for others.

Conclusions

Genetic status of DPC4 contributes to the recurrence patterns following pancreatectomy, and patients with an initially expressed DPC4 gene receive a greater benefit from intensive local control for locoregional recurrence. The DPC4 gene, therefore, may aid the establishment of treatment strategies for initial adjuvant treatment or for recurrent PDAC.