Oncological Benefits of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation With Gemcitabine Versus Upfront Surgery in Patients With Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Prospective, Randomized, Open-label, Multicenter Phase 2/3 Trial

Neoadjuvant therapy alters the immune microenvironment in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer has an exclusive inhibitory tumor microenvironment characterized by a dense mechanical barrier, profound infiltration of immunosuppressive cells, and a lack of penetration of effector T cells, which constitute an important cause for recurrence and metastasis, resistance to chemotherapy, and insensitivity to immunotherapy. Neoadjuvant therapy has been widely used in clinical practice due to its many benefits, including the ability to improve the R0 resection rate, eliminate tumor cell micrometastases, and identify highly malignant tumors that may not benefit from surgery. In this review, we summarize multiple aspects of the effect of neoadjuvant therapy on the immune microenvironment of pancreatic cancer, discuss possible mechanisms by which these changes occur, and generalize the theoretical basis of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy combined with immunotherapy, providing support for the development of more effective combination therapeutic strategies to induce potent immune responses to tumors.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy-Chemoradiation for Borderline-Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A UK Tertiary Surgical Oncology Centre Series

Background: Patients with borderline-resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) have historically poor survival, even after curative pancreatic resection and adjuvant chemotherapy. Emerging evidence suggests that neoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCR) improves R0 resection rates in BR-PDAC patients. We evaluated the R0 resection rate, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in our patients who underwent NCR for BR-PDAC at our institution. Methods: All patients who underwent NCR for BR-PDAC from January 2010 to March 2020 were included in the study. The patients received a variety of NCR regimens during the study period, and in patients with radiological evidence of tumour stability or regression, pancreatic resection was performed. The primary endpoint was the OS, and the secondary endpoints included patient morbidity, the R0 resection rate, histological parameters and the DFS. Results: The study included 29 patients (16 men and 13 women), with a median age of 65 years (range 46–74 years). Of these 29 patients, 17 received FOLFIRINOX and 12 received gemcitabine (GEM)-based NCR regimens. All patients received chemoradiation at the end of chemotherapy (range 45–56 Gy). R0 resection was achieved in 75% of the patients, with a higher rate noted in the FOLFIRINOX group. The median DFS was 22 months for the whole cohort but higher in the FOLFIRINOX group (34 months). The median OS for the cohort was 29 months, with a higher median OS noted for the FOLFIRINOX cohort versus the GEM cohort (42 versus 28 months). Conclusion: NCR, particularly FOLFIRINOX-based treatment, for BR-PDAC results in higher rates of R0 resection and an increased median DFS and OS, supporting its continued use in this patient group.

Radiotherapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Recent Developments and Advances on the Horizon

Current indications for radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer vary by surgical resectability status of the tumor. Radiation is generally not used pre-operatively for resectable tumors, but may be given adjuvantly particularly in settings of a close or positive surgical margin. For borderline resectable tumors, pre-operative radiation has been shown to improve surgical parameters including lowering nodal positivity and positive margin rates. For locally advanced unresectable tumors, radiation can improve local control, give patients an interval off of chemotherapy and provide symptomatic relief. Multidisciplinary discussion is critical for choosing the best modality and sequencing of care for patients with pancreatic cancer. Prospective trials with appropriately chosen endpoints and meticulous radiotherapy quality assurance are needed to best define populations with pancreatic cancer most likely to benefit from radiotherapy.

A novel online calculator to predict early recurrence and long-term survival of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreaticoduodenectomy: A multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is prone to relapse even after radical pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) (including robotic, laparoscopic and open approach). This study aimed to develop an online nomogram calculator to predict early recurrence (ER) (within one year after surgery) and long-term survival in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

Patients with PDAC after radical PD were included. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to identify independent risk factors. An online nomogram calculator was developed based on independent risk factors in the training cohort and then tested in the internal and external validation cohorts.

RESULTS

Of the 569 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 310, 155, and 104 patients were in the training, internal and external validation cohorts, respectively. Multivariate analysis revealed that preoperative carbohydrate antigen19-9 (CA19-9) [Odds Ratio (OR) 1.002; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.001-1.003; P = 0.001], fibrinogen/albumin (FAR) (OR 1.132; 95% CI 1.012-1.266; P = 0.029), N stage (OR 2.291; 95% CI 1.283-4.092; P = 0.005), and tumor differentiation (OR 3.321; 95% CI 1.278-8.631; P = 0.014) were independent risk factors for ER. Nomogram based on the above four factors achieved good C-statistics of 0.772, 0.767 and 0.765 in predicting ER in the training, internal and external validation cohorts, respectively. Time-dependent ROC analysis (timeROC) and decision curve analysis (DCA) revealed that the nomogram provided superior diagnostic capacity and net benefit compared with other staging systems.

CONCLUSION

This multi-center study developed and validated an online nomogram calculator that can predict ER and long-term survival in patients with PDAC with high degrees of stability and accuracy.

Proper adjuvant therapy in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer who had received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX

Background

The complete resection rate of pancreatic cancer has increased because of the advent of efficacious first-line treatments for unresectable pancreatic cancer. Still, strategies regarding adjuvant therapy after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment remain to be established.

Methods

Data on 144 patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer who underwent resection after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX between January 2013 and April 2021 were retrospectively reviewed.

Results

Among the study patients, 113 patients (78.5%) were diagnosed with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and 31 patients (21.5%) were diagnosed with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Seventy-five patients (52.1%) received radiotherapy before surgery. After radical resection, 84 patients (58.3%) received 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy and 60 patients (41.7%) received non-5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy. Adjuvant therapy with 5-fluorouracil-based regimen [hazard ratio (HR), 0.43 (95% CI, 0.21-0.87); p = 0.019], preoperative assessment as locally advanced pancreatic cancer [HR, 2.87 (95% CI, 1.08-7.64); p = 0.035], positive resection margin [HR, 3.91 (95% CI, 1.71-8.94); p = 0.001], and presence of pathologic lymph node involvement [HR, 2.31 (95% CI, 1.00-5.33), p = 0.050] were associated with decreased recurrence-free survival. Adjuvant therapy with 5-fluorouracil-based regimen [HR, 0.35 (95% CI, 0.15-0.84); p = 0.018], positive resection margin [HR, 4.14 (95% CI, 1.75-9.78); p = 0.001], presence of pathologic lymph node involvement [HR, 3.36 (95% CI, 1.23-9.15); p = 0.018], poor differentiation [HR, 5.69 (95% CI, 1.76-18.36); p = 0.004], and dose reduction during adjuvant therapy [HR, 1.78 (95% CI, 1.24-24.37); p = 0.025] were associated with decreased overall survival.

Conclusions

The 5-fluorouracil-based adjuvant therapy seems to be the proper adjuvant therapy for patients who received neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

Case report: Two PD-L1 positive unresectable advanced pancreatic carcinoma patients with microsatellite stability achieved R0 resection after PD-1 antibody plus chemotherapy as a successful downstaging therapy: A report of two cases

Background

Nonobvious early symptoms are a prominent characteristic of pancreatic cancer, resulting in only 20% of patients having resectable tumors at the time of diagnosis. The optimal management of unresectable advanced pancreatic cancer (UAPC) remains an open research question. In this study, the tumors shrank significantly after PD-1 antibody combined with chemotherapy in two UAPC patients, and both have achieved R0 (pathologically negative margin) resection and survival to date.

Case presentation

Case 1: A 53-year-old man was diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (Stage III). He received six cycles of PD-1 antibody plus chemotherapy as the first-line treatment. The tumor was reduced from 11.8×8.8 cm to “0” (the pancreatic head was normal as shown by enhanced computed tomography, ECT) after preoperative neoadjuvant therapy (PNT) and the adverse effects were tolerable. The patient underwent radical surgery and achieved R0 resection. Case 2: A 43-year-old man diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma with liver metastasis (Stage IV) received three cycles of PD-1 antibody combined with chemotherapy. The tumor was reduced from 5.2×3.9 cm to 2.4×2.3 cm with no side effects. The patient also underwent radical surgery and achieved R0 resection.

Conclusion

PD-1 antibody plus a chemotherapy regimen resulted in a surprising curative effect and safety in two patients with UAPC, which may portend an improvement in pancreatic carcinoma treatment. We may have a way for UAPC patients to obtain radical treatment and gain long-term survival. Two PD-L1 positive UAPC patients with microsatellite stability (MSS) enlighten us to have a more comprehensive understanding of the prediction of immunotherapy.

Impact of pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, S-1) and radiation for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a case report and review of literature

Background

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal malignancy, even if surgical resection is possible (median survival: < 30 months). The prognosis of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BR-PC) is even worse. There is no clear consensus on the optimal treatment strategy, including pre/postoperative therapy, for BR-PC. We report a patient with BR-PC who achieved clinical partial response with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) and underwent curative resection, resulting in pathological complete response (pCR).

Case presentation

A 71-year-old man with jaundice and liver dysfunction was referred to our department because of a 48-mm hypo-vascular mass in the pancreatic head with obstruction of the pancreatic and bile ducts and infiltration of superior mesenteric vein and portal vein. The lesion was identified as atypical cells which suggested adenocarcinoma by biopsy, and he was administered NACRT: gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel, following S-1 and intensity modulated radiation therapy. After reduction in the tumor size (clinical partial response), pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed, and pCR achieved. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 was initially administered and the patient is currently alive with no recurrence as of 2 years after surgery.

Conclusions

NACRT is a potentially useful treatment for BR-PC that may lead to pCR and help improve prognosis.

Does Concurrent Cholestasis Alter the Prognostic Value of Preoperatively Elevated CA19-9 Serum Levels in Patients with Pancreatic Head Adenocarcinoma?

Background

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients with preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) serum levels higher than 500 U/ml are classified as biologically borderline resectable (BR-B). To date, the impact of cholestasis on preoperative CA19-9 serum levels in these patients has remained unquantified.

Methods

Data on 3079 oncologic pancreatic resections due to PDAC that were prospectively acquired by the German Study, Documentation and Quality (StuDoQ) registry were analyzed in relation to preoperative CA19-9 and bilirubin serum values. Preoperative CA19-9 values were adjusted according to the results of a multivariable linear regression analysis of pathologic parameters, bilirubin, and CA19-9 values.

Results

Of 1703 PDAC patients with tumor located in the pancreatic head, 420 (24.5 %) presented with a preoperative CA19-9 level higher than 500 U/ml. Although receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis failed to determine exact CA19-9 cut-off values for prognostic indicators (R and N status), the T, N, and G status; the UICC stage; and the number of simultaneous vein resections increased with the level of preoperative CA19-9, independently of concurrent cholestasis. After adjustment of preoperative CA19-9 values, 18.5 % of patients initially staged as BR-B showed CA19-9 values below 500 U/ml. However, the postoperative pathologic results for these patients did not change compared with the patients who had CA19-9 levels higher than 500 U/ml after bilirubin adjustment.

Conclusions

In this multicenter dataset of PDAC patients, elevation of preoperative CA19-9 correlated with well-defined prognostic pathologic parameters. Bilirubin adjustment of CA19-9 is feasible but does not affect the prognostic value of CA19-9 in jaundiced patients.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-022-12460-w.

Oncologic Benefits of Neoadjuvant Treatment versus Upfront Surgery in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) has been primarily indicated for neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) in the last decade. This study is the updated meta-analysis for only patients with BRPC including recent NAT regimens such as FOLFIRINOX. The OS, R0 resection rate, and node-negativity rate was improved in NAT group compared with upfront surgery. Providing high-quality evidence is important to standardize the treatment protocol and help physicians decide the appropriate pancreatic cancer treatment.

Abstract

Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) followed by surgery is the primary treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). However, there is limited high-level evidence supporting the efficacy of NAT in BRPC. PubMed was searched to identify studies that compared the survival between BRPC patients who underwent NAT and those who underwent upfront surgery (UFS). The overall survival (OS) was compared using intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. A total of 1204 publications were identified, and 19 publications with 21 data sets (2906 patients; NAT, 1516; UFS, 1390) were analyzed. Two randomized controlled trials and two prospective studies were included. Thirteen studies performed an ITT analysis, while six presented the data of resected patients. The NAT group had significantly better OS than the UFS group in the ITT analyses (HR: 0.63, 95% CI = 0.53–0.76) and resected patients (HR: 0.68, 95% CI = 0.60–0.78). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine or S-1 and FOLFIRINOX improved the survival outcomes. Among the resected patients, the R0 resection and node-negativity rates were significantly higher in the NAT group. NAT improved the OS, R0 resection rate, and node-negativity rate compared with UFS. Standardizing treatment regimens based on high-quality evidence is fundamental for developing an optimal protocol.

Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a review and update on recent trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has been enthusiastically embraced for patients with operable pancreatic cancer (PDAC) in hopes of improving survival. However, the rapid integration of clinical trial data has made it difficult to discern optimal treatment strategies. The goal of this review is to summarize notable recent trials and their contributions to the field.

RECENT FINDINGS

The results of ESPAC-5F, NEOLAP-AIO-PAK-0113, SWOG1505, PREOPANC, HyperAcutePancreas, and ALLIANCE A021501 are reviewed in detail. These studies sequentially evaluate the different neoadjuvant treatment strategies, use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation, and immunotherapy in resectable, borderline-resectable, and locally advanced PDAC. Resection rate ranged from 24.4 to 95.7% (median 64.9%). These trials demonstrate median survival ranging from 14.9 to 41.0 months with progression-free survival ranging from 7.7 to 24.2 months. Survival results may be confounded by ability to reach resection, use of modern chemotherapy vs. gemcitabine monotherapy, and inclusion of locally advanced PDAC. Several upcoming trials will directly examine efficacy of NAT vs. adjuvant therapy, chemoradiation in the NAT setting, and molecular testing-driven chemotherapy selection.

SUMMARY

NAT is associated with improved survival for patients with borderline resectable PDAC but broader efficacy for resectable PDAC and optimal treatment strategy have yet to be defined.

Prognosis of pancreatic head cancer with different patterns of lymph node metastasis

BACKGROUND

The nodal stage of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is revised in the AJCC 8th edition. Studies on the prognosis of PDAC according to lymph node metastasis (LNM) are still ongoing. We attempted to find the patterns of nodal involvement and to reveal its clinical significance to overall survival (OS).

METHODS

We analyzed 585 patients who received pancreatic head cancer surgery diagnosed as PDAC from January 2007 to December 2016. Patients were classified into three groups: Group 1 (G1, patients without LNM), Group 2 (G2, those with LNM only in the peripancreatic area), and Group 3 (G3 those with LNM in the other area and/or peripancreatic LNM). Risk factors were analyzed by Cox-regression test and overall survival was compared by Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

LNM in peripancreatic area was the most common (88.7%). In the multivariate analysis, T stage, nuclear differentiation, adjuvant treatment, and the G2 and G3 were independent risk factors for OS (G2 over G1, HR 1.384, 95% CI 1.046-1.802; P = .036 and G3 over G1, HR 2.383, 95% CI 1.378-4.103; P = .001). G3 showed worse OS than G2 (P = .006). In the N1 status, LNM to the pericholedochal (PC) and superior mesenteric artery (SMA) areas resulted in worse OS than the G2 (P = .011 and P = .019).

CONCLUSIONS

We found that LNM beyond the peripancreatic area significantly affects OS in pancreatic head cancer patients. Depending on the station of the LNM, different risk-stratification and treatment strategies will need to be considered.

Downstaging of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma With Either Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy Improves Survival

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) or chemoradiation (NAC+XRT) is incorporated into the treatment of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), often with the goal of downstaging before resection. However, the effect of downstaging on overall survival, particularly the differential effects of NAC and NAC+XRT, remains undefined. This study examined the impact of downstaging from NAC and NAC+XRT on overall survival.

METHODS

The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB) was queried from 2006 to 2015 for patients with non-metastatic PDAC who received NAC or NAC+XRT. Rates of overall and nodal downstaging, and pathologic complete response (pCR) were assessed. Predictors of downstaging were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression. Overall survival (OS) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards modeling.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 2475 patients (975 NAC and 1500 NAC+XRT patients). Compared with NAC, NAC+XRT was associated with higher rates of overall downstaging (38.3 % vs 23.6 %; p ≤ 0.001), nodal downstaging (16.0 % vs 7.8 %; p ≤ 0.001), and pCR (1.7 % vs 0.7 %; p = 0.041). Receipt of NAC+XRT was independently predictive of overall (odds ratio [OR] 2.28; p < 0.001) and nodal (OR 3.09; p < 0.001) downstaging. Downstaging by either method was associated with improved 5-year OS (30.5 vs 25.2 months; p ≤ 0.001). Downstaging with NAC was associated with an 8-month increase in median OS (33.7 vs 25.6 months; p = 0.005), and downstaging by NAC+XRT was associated with a 5-month increase in median OS (30.0 vs 25.0 months; p = 0.008). Cox regression showed an association of overall downstaging with an 18 % reduction in the risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.82; 95 % confidence interval, 0.71-0.95; p = 0.01) CONCLUSION: Downstaging after neoadjuvant therapies improves survival. The addition of radiation therapy may increase the rate of downstaging without affecting overall oncologic outcomes.

Advances in the Surgical Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer

Three recent advances in the surgical approach to pancreatic cancer over the past decade have improved both short- and long-term outcomes for patients with nonmetastatic, operable pancreatic cancer. These include (1) minimally invasive pancreatectomy to reduce operative morbidity while adhering to principles of open oncologic resections, (2) neoadjuvant chemotherapy to treat radiographically occult metastatic disease and improve locoregional control, and (3) applying irreversible electroporation as an adjunct to surgery, allowing a fraction of locally advanced pancreatic cancer to be resected.

Advances and Remaining Challenges in the Treatment for Borderline Resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains one of the deadliest malignancies in the United States. Improvements in imaging have permitted the categorization of patients according to radiologic involvement of surrounding vasculature, i.e., upfront resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced disease, and this, in turn, has influenced the sequence of chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy. Though surgical resection remains the only curative treatment option, recent studies have shown improved overall survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, especially among patients with borderline resectable/locally advanced disease. The role of radiologic imaging after neoadjuvant therapy and the potential benefit of adjuvant therapy for borderline resectable and locally advanced disease remain areas of ongoing investigation. The advances made in the treatment of patients with borderline resectable/locally advanced disease are promising, yet disparities in access to cancer care persist. This review highlights the significant advances that have been made in the treatment of borderline resectable and locally advanced PDAC, while also calling attention to the remaining challenges.

Neoadjuvant treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: Chemoradiation or stereotactic body radiation therapy?

Despite recent advances, the prognosis of pancreatic adenocarcinomas remains poor, even for patients with resectable tumors. For these latter, new approaches based on neoadjuvant treatment have been developed. Two components are used: chemotherapy and radiation therapy (RT). Indeed, pre-operative RT has many advantages in terms of efficacy and tolerance. It increases notably the chances of subsequent complete tumor resection. Several prospective trials are currently ongoing to clarify its place in the therapeutic arsenal. Another crucial question is to know which is the best RT technique: conventional normofractionated chemoradiotherapy or hypofrationated stereotactic body RT?

Tumor metabolic alterations after neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy predict postoperative recurrence in patients with pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the metabolic changes in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma to identify the mechanisms of treatment response of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy.

METHODS

Frozen tumor and non-neoplastic pancreas tissues were prospectively obtained from 88 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent curative-intent surgery. Sixty-two patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and 26 patients did not receive neoadjuvant therapy (control group). Comprehensive analysis of metabolites in tumor and non-neoplastic pancreatic tissue was performed by capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry.

RESULTS

Capillary electrophoresis-mass spectrometry detected 90 metabolites for analysis among more than 500 ionic metabolites quantified. There were significant differences in 27 tumor metabolites between the neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy and control groups. There were significant differences in eight metabolites [1-MethylnNicotinamide, Carnitine, Glucose, Glutathione (red), N-acetylglucosamine 6-phosphate, N-acetylglucosamine 1-phosphate, UMP, Phosphocholine] between good responder and poor responder for neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy. Among these metabolites, phosphocholine, Carnitine and Glutathione were associated with recurrence-free survival only in the neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy group. Microarray confirmed marked gene suppression of choline transporters [CTL1-4 (SLC44A1-44A4)] in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma tissue of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy group.

CONCLUSION

The present study identifies several important metabolic consequences and potential neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy targets in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Choline metabolism is one of the key pathways involved in recurrence of the patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy.

The Association Between Neoadjuvant Therapy and Pathological Outcomes in Pancreatic Cancer Patients After Resection: Prognostic Significance of Microscopic Venous Invasion

BACKGROUND

The impact of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) on pathological outcomes, including microscopic venous invasion (MVI), remains unclear in pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

A total of 456 patients who underwent pancreatectomy for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer between July 2012 and February 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups: patients with NAT (n = 120, 26%) and those without NAT (n = 336, 74%). Clinicopathological factors, survival outcomes and recurrence patterns were analyzed.

RESULTS

Regarding pathological findings, the proportion of MVI was significantly lower in patients with NAT than in those without NAT (43% vs 62%, P = 0.001). The 5-year survival rate in patients with NAT was significantly better than that in those without NAT (54% vs 45%, P = 0.030). A multivariate analysis showed that MVI was an independent prognostic factor for the overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio 2.86, P = 0.003) in patients who underwent NAT. MVI was an independent risk factor for liver recurrence (odds ratio [OR] 2.38, P = 0.016) and multiple-site recurrence (OR 1.92, P = 0.027) according to a multivariate analysis. The OS in patients with liver recurrence was significantly worse than that in patients with other recurrence patterns (vs lymph node, P = 0.047; vs local, P < 0.001; vs lung, P < 0.001). The absence of NAT was a significant risk factor for MVI (OR 1.93, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

MVI was a crucial prognostic factor associated with liver and multiple-site recurrence in pancreatic cancer patients with NAT. MVI may be reduced by NAT, which may contribute to the improvement of survival in pancreatic cancer patients.

Pathological and surgical outcomes of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) after pre-operative ablative stereotactic magnetic resonance image-guided adaptive radiotherapy (A-SMART)

Purpose

Preoperative radiation therapy (RT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma reduces positive surgical margin rates, and when delivered to an ablative dose range it may improve local control and overall survival for patients with unresectable disease. Use of stereotactic body RT to achieve a higher biologically effective dose has been limited by toxicity to adjacent radiosensitive structures, but this can be mitigated by stereotactic magnetic resonance image guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART).

Methods and Materials

We describe our single-institution experience of high biologically effective dose SMART before resection of localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Toxicity was evaluated according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (V 5.0). Tumor response was evaluated according to the College of American Pathologists tumor regression grading criteria.

Results

We analyzed 26 patients with borderline resectable (80.8%), locally advanced (11.5%), and resectable (7.7%) tumors who received ablative dose SMART (A-SMART) followed by surgical resection. Median age at diagnosis was 68 years (range, 34-86). Most patients received chemotherapy (80.8%) before RT. All patients received A-SMART to a median dose of 50 (range, 40-50) Gy in 5 fractions. Toxicity data were collected prospectively and there were no acute grade 2+ toxicities associated with RT. The median time to resection was 50 days (range, 37-115), and the procedure types included Whipple (69%), distal (23%), or total pancreatectomy (8%). The R0 resection rate was 96% and no perioperative deaths occurred within 90 days. Pathologic response was observed in 88% of cases. The time from RT to surgery was associated with tumor regression grade (P = .0003). The median follow-up after RT was 16.5 months (range, 3.9-26.2). The derived median progression-free survival from RT was 13.2 months.

Conclusions

The initial surgical and pathologic outcomes after A-SMART are encouraging. Preoperative A-SMART was associated with low toxicity rates and no surgical or RT-associated mortality. The surgical morbidity was comparable to historic rates after upfront resection. These data also suggest that the time from stereotactic body RT to surgical resection is associated with pathologic response.

Resectability Status of Pancreatic Cancer Having Tumor Contact with an Aberrant Right Hepatic Artery: Is Upfront Surgery Justified?

BACKGROUND

The NCCN guidelines define pancreatic cancer that has contact with an aberrant right hepatic artery (A-RHA) as a borderline-resectable tumor. However, the impact of tumor contact with an A-RHA on surgical and survival outcomes has not been well discussed.

METHODS

A total of 541 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for resectable and borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer between 2002 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The presence of an A-RHA and tumor contact with an A-RHA were evaluated based on the preoperative computed tomography findings. Patients with resectable tumors and tumors with A-RHA-contact (having contact with an A-RHA without involvement of the major arteries) were generally treated by upfront surgery, whereas those with borderline-resectable tumors generally underwent neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent resection.

RESULTS

Among the 541 patients, 116 (21.4%) had an A-RHA and 15 (2.8%) had tumor with A-RHA-contact. The A-RHA was resected in 12, and arterial reconstruction was performed in 8. The rates of morbidity and R1 resection in patients with an A-RHA (32.8 and 10.3%, respectively) were comparable to those without an A-RHA (27.3 and 11.3%, respectively). The overall survival in patients with A-RHA-contact was significantly worse than that in patients with borderline-resectable tumors (median survival time, 14.6 vs. 35.3 months, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Although upfront resection was safely performed and led to a high R0 resection rate in patients with A-RHA-contact, the survival outcome was dismal. A tumor with A-RHA-contact should be regarded as technically resectable but oncologically borderline-resectable. Upfront surgery may not be appropriate for patients with A-RHA-contact.

Comparing Post-Operative Outcomes of Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Neoadjuvant Therapy Versus Surgery First Approach

OBJECTIVES

Optimal use of surgery first (SF) vs neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is still unclear. There is concern that NAT may result in worsened post-operative outcomes. Our study objectives were to show the impact of NAT on post-operative morbidity and mortality.

METHODS

All patients undergoing resection for PDAC between 1/1/2010 and 12/31/2020 were reviewed and those who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) were included. Demographics, perioperative details, and pathology details were gathered. Data pertaining to 90-day complications were obtained and graded according to international consensus guidelines. Those undergoing SF were compared to those who had NAT. Categorical variables were compared by Fisher's exact test and continuous variables by Student's t-test.

RESULTS

Two hundred and forty-one subjects who underwent PD for PDAC were included in this review. There was no significant difference in the rate of major morbidity between subjects who received NAT vs SF (19.4 vs 20.3%, P = 1.0). Similarly, there were no significant differences in the rates of mortality (3.1 vs 4.2%, P = .742), post-operative pancreatic fistula (8.2 vs 10.5%, P = .658), or post-pancreatectomy hemorrhage (7.1 vs 7.7%, P = 1.0), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Post-operative outcomes are not worsened by the use of the NAT approach prior to PD for PDAC. Further investigation is needed to reveal which patient subgroups may benefit from the use of NAT, especially regarding survival.

The short-term outcomes of distal pancreatectomy with portal vein/superior mesenteric vein resection

BACKGROUND

Portal vein/superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) resection during distal pancreatectomy (DP) is often associated with technical difficulties due to the close anatomic relationship between pancreatic head and PV/SMV. In this paper, we present our operative technique and short-term outcomes of DP combined with venous resection (DP-VR) for left-sided pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

We reviewed 368 consecutive cases of DP for PC from January 2013 to December 2018 in our institution, and identified 41 patients (11.1%) who had undergone DP-VR. The remaining 327 DP patients (88.9%) were matched to DP-VR using propensity scores in the proportion of 1:2. Demographics, intraoperative details, postoperative complications and the pathological results were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Out of the 41 DP-VR cases, in 14 (34.1%) venous resection with primary closure was performed, while the remaining 27 (65.9%) underwent end-to-end anastomosis without graft. A propensity-score-matched analysis revealed that DP-VR caused an increased risk of postoperative bleeding (17.1% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.016) and delayed gastric emptying (9.8% vs. 1.2%, P = 0.042) compared to standard DP. Overall morbidity (46.3% vs. 36.6%, P = 0.332), postoperative pancreatic fistula (31.7% vs. 26.8%, P = 0.672), R0 resection (58.5% vs. 67.1%, P = 0.223), 30-day reoperation (2.4% vs. 3.7%, P = 0.719), and 90-day mortality (0% vs. 2.5%, P = 0.550) were comparable between the two groups. In postoperative computed tomographic scans of 34 patients (82.9%) at a 90-day follow-up, PV/SMV stenosis was suggested in two patients (5.9%).

CONCLUSION

Despite the higher rates of postoperative bleeding, DP-VR was found to be a feasible and safe surgery with acceptable postoperative morbidity and mortality compared to standard DP for left-sided pancreatic cancer.

Trends in the surgical treatment for pancreatic cancer in the last 30 years

Pancreatic cancer has the poorest prognosis among digestive cancers. During the 1990s, the 5-year survival rate of surgical patients with pancreatic cancer was 14% in Japan. However, survival rates have increased to 40% in the 2020s due to the refinement of surgical procedures and the introduction of perioperative chemotherapy. Several pivotal randomized controlled trials have played an indispensable role to establish each standard treatment strategy. Resectability of pancreatic cancer can be classified into resectable, borderline resectable, and unresectable based on the anatomic configuration, and multidisciplinary treatment strategies for each classification have been revised rapidly. Investigation of superior perioperative adjuvant treatments for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and the establishment of optimal conversion surgery for unresectable pancreatic cancer are the progressive subjects.

Current status and future perspectives of clinical research in pancreatic cancer: Establishment of evidence by science

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive diseases in the world due to a lack of early detection, leading to an overall 5-year survival of only 10%. In recent years, clinical trials targeted pancreatic cancer in efforts to improve survival. These studies introduce new technologies, concepts, and evidence which have instilled new optimism for improving prognosis. This review summarizes the current status of the recent (5-year) clinical trials and describes contemporary research on pancreatic cancer, including surgical technology, diagnostic skills, traditional chemoradiotherapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and precision medicine. Then, the future trend and direction of clinical trials on pancreatic cancer are discussed.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy endows CD9 with prognostic value that differs between tumor and stromal areas in patients with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The selective pressure imposed by chemotherapy creates a barrier to tumor eradication and an opportunity for metastasis and recurrence. As a newly discovered stemness marker of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), the impact of CD9 on tumor progression and patient's prognosis remain controversial.

METHODS

A total of 179 and 211 PDAC patients who underwent surgical resection with or without neoadjuvant chemotherapy, respectively, were recruited for immunohistochemical analyses of CD9 expression in both tumor and stromal areas prior to statistical analyses to determine the prognostic impact and predictive accuracy of CD9.

RESULTS

The relationship between CD9 and prognostic indicators was not significant in the non-neoadjuvant group. Nevertheless, CD9 expression in both tumor (T-CD9) and stromal areas (S-CD9) was significantly correlated with the clinicopathological features in the neoadjuvant group. High levels of T-CD9 were significantly associated with worse OS (p = 0.005) and RFS (p = 0.007), while positive S-CD9 showed the opposite results (OS: p = 0.024; RFS: p = 0.008). Cox regression analyses identified CD9 in both areas as an independent prognostic factor. The T&S-CD9 risk-level system was used to stratify patients with different survival levels. The combination of T&S-CD9 risk level and TNM stage were accurate predictors of OS (C-index: 0.676; AIC: 512.51) and RFS (C-index: 0.680; AIC: 519.53). The calibration curve of the nomogram composed of the combined parameters showed excellent predictive consistency for 1-year RFS. These results were verified using a validation cohort.

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy endows CD9 with a significant prognostic value that differs between tumor and stromal areas in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A review

BACKGROUND

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer constitutes a complex clinical entity, presenting the clinician with a locally aggressive disease that has a proclivity for distant spread. The benefits of radiation therapy, such as improved local control and improved survival, have been questioned. In this review we seek to summarize the existing evidence on radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and highlight future areas of research.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of PubMed for clinical studies reporting outcomes in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer was performed in June 2021, with an emphasis placed on prospective studies.

RESULTS

Radiologic "downstaging" in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is a rare event, although some evidence shows increased clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy over radiation therapy. Margin status seems to be equivalent between regimens that use neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and regimens that include neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Local control in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is likely improved with radiation therapy; however, the benefit of improved local control in a disease marked by systemic failure has been questioned. Although some studies have shown improved survival with radiation therapy, differences in the delivery and tolerance of chemotherapy between the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting confound these results. When the evidence is evaluated as a whole, there is no clear survival benefit of radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

Once considered a staple of therapy, the role of radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is evolving as systemic therapy regimens continues to improve. Increased clinical understanding of disease phenotype and response are needed to accurately tailor therapy for individual patients and to improve outcomes in this complex patient population.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Where Do We Go?

The incidence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been on the rise in recent years; however, its clinical diagnosis and treatment remain challenging. Although surgical resection remains the only chance for long-term patient survival, the likelihood of initial resectability is no higher than 20%. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in PDAC aims to transform the proportion of inoperable PDACs into operable cases and reduce the likelihood of recurrence to improve overall survival. Ongoing phase 3 clinical trial aims to validate the role of NAT in PDAC therapy, including prolongation of survival, increased R0 resection, and a higher proportion of negative lymph nodes. Controversies surrounding the role of NAT in PDAC treatment include applicability to different stages of PDAC, chemotherapy regimens, radiation, duration of treatment, and assessment of effect. This review aims to summarize the current progress and controversies of NAT in PDAC.

Characterizing the patient experience during neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy (NT) has increasingly been utilized for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). It is the recommended approach for borderline resectable (BR) and locally advanced (LA) cancers and an increasingly utilized option for potentially resectable (PR) disease. Despite its increased use, little research has focused on patient-centered metrics among patients undergoing NT, including patient experiences, preferences, and recommendations. A better understanding of all aspects of the patient experience during NT may identify opportunities to design interventions aimed at improving quality of life; it may also facilitate the completion of NT and receipt of surgery, ultimately optimizing long-term outcomes.

AIM

To understand the experience of patients initiating and receiving NT to identify opportunities to improve neoadjuvant cancer care delivery.

METHODS

Semi-structured interviews of patients with localized PDAC during NT were conducted to explore their experience initiating and receiving NT. Interviews took place between August 2020 and October 2021. Due to the descriptive nature of the research, questions were open ended. Interviews were conducted over the phone, audio recorded and then transcribed. All interviews were coded by two independent researchers using NVivo 12, iteratively identifying themes until thematic saturation was achieved. An integrative approach to qualitative analysis was used, utilizing both inductive and deductive methods.

RESULTS

A total of 12 patients with localized PDAC were interviewed. Patients with BR (n = 7), PR (n = 2), and LA (n = 3) cancers participated in the study. All patients indicated that choosing NT was the doctor's recommendation, while most reported not being familiar with the concept of NT (n = 11) and that NT was presented as the only option (n = 8). Five themes describing the patient experience emerged: physical symptoms, emotional symptoms, coping mechanisms, access to care, and life factors. The most commonly cited recommendation for improving the experience of NT was improved education before and during NT (n = 7). Patients highlighted the need for more information on the rationale behind choosing NT prior to surgery, the anticipated surgery and its likelihood of surgery occurring after NT, as well as general information prior to starting NT treatment. The need for seeing different members of the healthcare team, including ancillary services was also frequently cited as a recommendation for improving the experience of NT (n = 5).

CONCLUSION

This study provides a framework to allow for a better understanding of the PDAC patient experience during NT and highlights opportunities to improve quality and quantity of life outcomes.

Postoperative hyperprogression disease of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after curative resection: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Prognosis for patients recurred rapidly after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was extremely poor. We proposed the concept of postoperative hyper-progression disease (PO-HPD) to define recurrence within 2 months after surgery, explored the role of surgery for postoperative HPD patients and determined the predictive preoperative risk factors and genomic features of PO-HPD.

METHODS

976 patients undergoing curative resection of PDAC were enrolled. Survival data of 1733 stage IV patients from the US Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database was also collected. Patients relapsed were grouped into 3 groups regarding of the recurrence time (within 2 months were PO-HPD, within 2 to 12 months were early recurrence (ER) and within > 12 months were late recurrence (LR)). Risk factors for PO-HPD were explored with logistic regression models. Genomic features of 113 patients were investigated using next-generation sequencing-based gene panel testing.

RESULTS

718 of 976 cases relapsed, 101were PO-HPD, 418 were ER and 199 were LR. Total survival of PO-HPD was 12.5 months, shorter than that of ER (16.7 months) and LR (35.1 months), and verged on that of stage IV patients (10.6 months). Preoperative risk factors for PO-HPD included red blood cell count < 3.94*10^12/L, CA19-9 ≥ 288.6 U/mL, CA125 ≥ 22.3 U/mL and tumor size≥3.45 cm. Mutations of CEBPA, ATR and JAK1 were only identified in PO-HPD and they owned lower level of CN gain compared to others.

CONCLUSIONS

Prognosis of PO-HPD was extremely poor and the role of surgery for PO-HPD should be prudently assessed.

Clinical challenges associated with utility of neoadjuvant treatment in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an increasingly common cancer with a persistently poor prognosis, and only approximately 20% of patients are clearly anatomically resectable at diagnosis. Historically, a paucity of effective therapy made it inappropriate to forego the traditional gold standard of upfront surgery in favour of neoadjuvant treatment; however, modern combination chemotherapy regimens have made neoadjuvant therapy increasingly viable. As its use has expanded, the rationale for neoadjuvant therapy has evolved from one of 'downstaging' to one of early treatment of micro-metastases and selection of patients with favourable tumour biology for resection. Defining resectability in PDAC is problematic; multiple differing definitions exist. Multidisciplinary input, both in initial assessment of resectability and in supervision of multimodality therapy, is therefore advised. European and North American guidelines recommend the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in borderline resectable (BR)-PDAC. Similar regimens may be applied in locally advanced (LA)-PDAC with the aim of improving potential access to curative-intent resection, but appropriate patient selection is key due to significant rates of recurrence after excision of LA disease. Upfront surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy remain standard-of-care in clearly resectable PDAC, but multiple trials evaluating the use of neoadjuvant therapy in this and other localised settings are ongoing.

Robotic versus open pancreaticoduodenectomy with vascular resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: surgical and oncological outcomes from pilot experience

PURPOSE

Venous resection and reconstruction (VR) is a feasible surgical technique to achieve optimal outcomes in selected patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who undergo open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD). However, data regarding patient outcomes in patients who undergo VR in robotic-assisted pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) are scarce.

METHODS

All patients with a diagnosis of PDAC who underwent upfront open or robotic pancreatoduodenectomy with VR in a high-volume institution for pancreatic surgery between 2011 and 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Perioperative and long-term outcomes were compared between the RPD and OPD cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 84 patients were included in the final analysis, 14 patients underwent RPD with VR and 70 who had OPD with VR. Reconstructed venous patency, postoperative 30-day morbidity, and 90-day mortality were comparable; however, lymph node resection rates were lower in the RPC cohort (p = 0.029). No difference was identified in 3-year survival rates between the two groups (34.0% versus 25.7% respectively, p = 0.667).

CONCLUSION

RPD with VR is a feasible approach for patients with PDAC and venous invasion. Further studies are needed to assess long-term outcomes compared to the open approach.

The association between quality care and outcomes for a real-world population of Australian patients diagnosed with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

This study: (i) assessed compliance with a consensus set of quality indicators (QIs) in pancreatic cancer (PC); and (ii) evaluated the association between compliance with these QIs and survival.

METHODS

Four years of data were collected for patients diagnosed with PC. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A multivariable analysis tested the relationship between significant patient and hospital characteristics, patient cluster effects within hospitals and survival.

RESULTS

1061 patients were eligible for this study. Significant association with improved survival were: (i) in the potentially resectable group having adjuvant chemotherapy administered following surgery or a reason documented (HR, 0.29; 95 CI, 0.19-0.46); (ii) in the locally advanced group included having chemotherapy ± chemoradiation, or a reason documented for not undergoing treatment (HR, 0.38; 95 CI, 0.25-0.58); and (iii) in the metastatic disease group included having documented performance status at presentation (HR, 0.65; 95 CI, 0.47-0.89), being seen by an oncologist in the absence of treatment (HR, 0.48; 95 CI, 0.31-0.77), and disease management discussed at a multidisciplinary team meeting (HR, 0.79; 95 CI, 0.64-0.96).

CONCLUSION

Capture of a concise data set has enabled quality of care to be assessed.

Pancreatic cancer survival by stage and age in seven high-income countries (ICBP SURVMARK-2): a population-based study

BACKGROUND

The global burden of pancreatic cancer has steadily increased, while the prognosis after pancreatic cancer diagnosis remains poor. This study aims to compare the stage- and age-specific pancreatic cancer net survival (NS) for seven high-income countries: Australia, Canada, Denmark, Ireland, New Zealand, Norway, and United Kingdom.

METHODS

The study included over 35,000 pancreatic cancer cases diagnosed during 2012-2014, followed through 31 December 2015. The stage- and age-specific NS were calculated using the Pohar-Perme estimator.

RESULTS

Pancreatic cancer survival estimates were low across all 7 countries, with 1-year NS ranging from 21.1% in New Zealand to 30.9% in Australia, and 3-year NS from 6.6% in the UK to 10.9% in Australia. Most pancreatic cancers were diagnosed with distant stage, ranging from 53.9% in Ireland to 83.3% in New Zealand. While survival differences were evident between countries across all stage categories at one year after diagnosis, this survival advantage diminished, particularly in cases with distant stage.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the importance of stage and age at diagnosis in pancreatic cancer survival. Although progress has been made in improving pancreatic cancer prognosis, the disease is highly fatal and will remain so without major breakthroughs in the early diagnosis and management.

Centralization of pancreatic cancer treatment within an integrated healthcare system improves overall survival

BACKGROUND

Higher-volume centers for pancreatic cancer surgeries have been shown to have improved outcomes such as length of stay. We examined how centralization of pancreatic cancer care within a regional integrated healthcare system improves overall survival.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of 1621 patients treated for pancreatic cancer from February 2010 to December 2018. Care was consolidated into 4 Centers of Excellence (COE) in surgery, medical oncology, and other specialties. Descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, Chi-square tests, and Kaplan-Meier analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use rose from 10% to 31% (p < .001). The median overall survival (OS) improved by 3 months after centralization (p < .001), but this did not reach significance on multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that in a large integrated healthcare system, centralization improves overall survival and neoadjuvant therapy utilization for pancreatic cancer patients.

Consensus Statement on Mandatory Measurements for Pancreatic Cancer Trials for Patients With Resectable or Borderline Resectable Disease (COMM-PACT-RB): A Systematic Review and Delphi Consensus Statement

Importance

Pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer death; however, randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of survival in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer lack mandatory measures for reporting baseline and prognostic factors, which hampers comparisons between outcome measures.

Objective

To develop a consensus on baseline and prognostic factors to be used as mandatory measurements in RCTs of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Evidence Review

We performed a systematic literature search of the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, and Embase for RCTs on resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with overall survival as the primary outcome. We produced a systematic summary of all baseline and prognostic factors identified in the RCTs. A Delphi panel that included 13 experts was surveyed to reach a consensus on mandatory and recommended baseline and prognostic factors.

Findings

The 42 RCTs that met inclusion criteria reported a total of 60 baseline and 19 prognostic factors. After 2 Delphi rounds, agreement was reached on 50 mandatory baseline and 20 mandatory prognostic factors for future RCTs, with a distinction between studies of neoadjuvant vs adjuvant treatment.

Conclusion and Relevance

This findings of this systematic review and international expert consensus have produced this Consensus Statement on Mandatory Measurements in Pancreatic Cancer Trials for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Disease (COMM-PACT-RB). The baseline and prognostic factors comprising the mandatory measures will facilitate better comparison across RCTs and eventually will enable improved clinical practice among patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Tumor resectability and response on CT following neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: inter-observer agreement study

OBJECTIVES

First, to measure inter-observer agreement regarding tumor resectability and response, and second, to measure diagnostic performance in predicting negative resection margin, on re-staging CTs of patients who received neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who received neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer from 2017 to 2020. Six readers independently evaluated initial staging and re-staging CT images. They categorized the resectability on re-staging CT based on the NCCN guideline, and evaluated tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy according to our proposed criteria on a 5-grade scale. For inter-observer agreement, Gwet's agreement coefficients were used. A crossed random effect model was used to pool the sensitivity and specificity of six readers in predicting negative resection margin.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients with the median age of 66 (59-70) were included. The pooled agreement for tumor resectability was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.56-0.71) for differentiating the three categories, and 0.84 (0.77-0.91) for differentiating resectable or borderline resectable cancer vs. unresectable cancer. Agreement for tumor response grade was 0.89 (0.85-0.92). The pooled sensitivity and specificity for predicting negative resection margin were 48% (43-52%) and 61% (57-64%), respectively, when only "resectable" on re-staging CT was considered as index test positive. When either "resectable"' or "borderline resectable" was considered as positive, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91% (89-94%) and 5% (4-6%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

CT can be used reliably with a high inter-observer agreement in selecting candidates for surgery after neoadjuvant therapy of pancreatic cancer.

KEY POINTS

• On CT following neoadjuvant therapy of pancreatic cancer, six readers showed high agreement in differentiating resectable or borderline resectable vs. unresectable cancer (Gwet's coefficient, 0.84). • Inter-observer agreement was also high for our proposed tumor response grade (Gwet's coefficient, 0.89). • Specificity was very low (5%) while sensitivity was high (91%) when either resectable or borderline resectable cancer on re-staging CT was considered as predictive of negative resection margin status.

Prognostic Factors in Patients With Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Resection

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant treatment (NT) has become standard in the management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BR-PDAC), improving prognosis. The primary mechanism for this improvement remains unclear.

METHODS

Clinicopathological data of patients with BR-PDAC who underwent resection between January 2008 and December 2018 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Univariable and multivariate analyses were used to compare survival between patients who received NT vs. those who underwent upfront resection (UR).

RESULTS

A total of 138 patients were included, 64 underwent UR and 74 NT. Neoadjuvant treatment resulted in higher margin-negative (R0) resection rate (68.9%) than UR (43.8%, P = .005). Neoadjuvant treatment was associated with improved overall survival (OS, P = .009) and progression-free survival (PFS, P = .027). R0 resection was also associated with improved OS (P < .001) and PFS (P < .001). On multivariable analysis, when adjusting for clinically relevant variables without considering R status, NT was an independent predictor for improved OS (P = .046) and PFS (P = .040). When additionally accounting for margin status, R0 was an independent predictor for improved OS (P < .001) and PFS (P < .001), while NT was not. Subgroup analysis, stratified by margin status, revealed that NT was not an independent predictor for OS or PFS for either subgroup.

DISCUSSION

Neoadjuvant treatment is associated with improved OS and PFS in patients with BR-PDAC; however, this effect is outweighed by margin status. These results suggest that the primary benefit of NT was dependent on facilitating R0 resection. Upfront resection might remain a valid treatment option if R0 resection could be accurately predicted.

Efficacy and Safety of Reirradiation with Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Locally Recurrent Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to report on outcomes of a cohort of patients who were treated with reirradiation with stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) for locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients treated with SBRT reirradiation for locally recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma from December 2009 to April 2020 were included in the study. Descriptive statistics were used to record patient demographics, tumour and treatment characteristics. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to evaluate overall survival, local progression-free survival (LPFS), distant metastasis-free survival and progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

In total, 27 patients were included in the study. The median follow-up time from local recurrence was 19.7 months (range 4.2-43.1 months). Most patients received five-fraction SBRT (26/27, 96%). The median overall survival after local recurrence treatment was 18.3 months (range 3.0-42.6 months), with 6-month, 1-year and 2-year overall survival rates of 88.5%, 73.1% and 33.6%. The median LPFS after local recurrence treatment was 16.2 months (range 2.3-33.6 months), with 6-month, 1-year and 2-year LPFS rates of 95.8%, 62.9% and 27.2%. Peri-SBRT chemotherapy improved LPFS (median 17.5 versus 8.5 months; P = 0.010) and overall survival (median 19.3 versus 5.5 months; P = 0.049). Tumours ≤ 3 cm in the greatest dimension showed better local control (median LPFS 19.2 versus 10.2 months; P = 0.130). There was one case (4%) of acute grade 3 pain and one case (4%) of late grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Reirradiation with five-fraction SBRT is safe, but local control remains suboptimal. Patients with smaller tumours experienced improved outcomes, as did patients whose treatment plan included the administration of peri-SBRT chemotherapy.

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer. Is It Time for Pushing on It?

Pancreatic resection still represents the only curative option for patients affected by pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, the association with modern chemotherapy regimens is a key factor in improving the inauspicious oncological outcome. The benefit of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for borderline resectable/locally advanced PDAC has been demonstrated; this evidence raises the question of whether even resectable PDAC should undergo NAT rather than upfront surgery. NAT may avoid futile surgery because of undetected distant metastases or aggressive tumor biology, providing more effective systemic control of the disease, which is hampered when adjuvant chemotherapy is delayed or precluded. However, recent data show controversial results regarding the efficacy and safety of NAT in resectable PDAC compared to upfront surgery. Although several prospective studies and meta-analyses indicate better oncologic outcomes after NAT, there are some biases, such as the methodological approaches used to capture the events of interest, which could make these results hardly reproducible. For instance, per-protocol studies, considering only the postoperative outcomes, tend to overestimate the performance of NAT by excluding patients who will never be suitable for surgery due to the development of chemotoxicity or tumor progression. To draw reliable conclusions, the studies should capture the events of interest of both strategies (NAT/upfront surgery) from the time of allocation to a specific treatment in an intention-to-treat fashion. This critical review highlights the current literature data concerning the use of NAT in resectable PDAC, summarizing the results of high-quality studies and focusing on the methodological issues of the most recent pieces of evidence.

The expression and prognostic value of toll-like receptors (TLRs) in pancreatic cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy

OBJECTIVES

Toll-like receptors (TLRs) play a pivotal role in the immune system and carcinogenesis. There is no research on TLR expression and association with survival among preoperatively treated pancreatic cancer patients. We studied the expression intensity and prognostic value of TLRs in pancreatic cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and compared the results to patients undergoing upfront surgery (US).

METHOD

Between 2000 and 2015, 71 borderline resectable patients were treated with NAT and surgery and 145 resectable patients underwent upfront surgery at Helsinki University Hospital, Finland. We immunostained TLRs 1-5, 7, and 9 on sections of tissue-microarray. We classified TLR expression as 0 (negative), 1 (mild), 2 (moderate), or 3 (strong) and divided into high (2-3) and low (0-1) expression for statistical purposes.

RESULTS

Among TLRs 1, 3, and 9 (TLR1 81% vs 70%, p = 0.008; TLR3 92% vs 68%, p = 0.001; TLR9 cytoplasmic 83% vs 42%, p<0.001; TLR9 membranous 53% vs 25%, p = 0.002) NAT patients exhibited a higher immunopositivity score more frequently than patients undergoing upfront surgery. Among NAT patients, a high expression of TLR1 [Hazards ratio (HR) 0.48, p<0.05] associated with a longer postoperative survival, whereas among US patients, high expression of TLR5 (HR 0.64, p<0.05), TLR7 (HR 0.59, p<0.01, and both TLR7 and TLR9 (HR 0.5, p<0.01) predicted a favorable postoperative outcome in separate analysis adjusted for background variables.

CONCLUSIONS

We found higher immunopositive intensities among TLRs 1, 3, and 9 in NAT patients. A high TLR1 expression associated with a longer survival among NAT patients, however, among US patients, high expression intensity of TLR5 and TLR7 predicted a favorable postoperative outcome in the adjusted analysis.

Prognostic Analysis of Distal Pancreatectomy for Pancreatic Body and/or Tail Cancer Involving the Portal Vein: Is Pancreatic Body and/or Tail Cancer Involving the Portal Vein Resectable?

OBJECTIVES

To the best of our knowledge, the prognostic impact of distal pancreatectomy (DP) for pancreatic body and/or tail cancer involving portal vein (PV) has not been analyzed.

METHODS

A total of 155 patients with pancreatic body and/or tail cancer who were eligible candidates for resection between 2002 and 2017 were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven patients had PV contact ≤180°. Fifteen patients underwent preoperative treatment; finally, 132 patients underwent DP, and 21 underwent DP with celiac axis resection. The overall survival (OS) of the PV contact group (n = 27, median survival time [MST], 25.6 months) was worse than the non-PV contact group (n = 128; MST, 58.4 months; P = 0.002); however, it was better than the unresectable group (MST, 14.2 months; P = 0.011). The OS of the PV contact with preoperative chemotherapy group (MST, not available) was comparable to the non-PV contact group and better than the PV contact without preoperative chemotherapy group (MST, 13.4 months; P = 0.017). The multivariate analysis identified PV contact ( P = 0.046) as one of the independent prognostic factors of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatic body and/or tail cancer contact with PV ≤180° should be considered borderline resectable because of poor survival.

Surgical management of pancreatic cancer liver oligometastases

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive cancer, which commonly metastasizes to the liver. The current standard of care for metastatic PDAC is systemic chemotherapy, however there are limited emerging data regarding surgical resection of pancreatic oligometastases in select patients. Here we review the literature addressing resection of PDAC liver oligometastases.

External Validity of the Multicenter Randomized PREOPANC Trial on Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: Outcome of Eligible but Nonrandomized Patients

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the accrual proportion and patients' reasons for not participating in the PREOPANC trial on neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, and to compare these patients' outcomes with those of patients who had been randomized in the trial.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

The external validity of multicenter randomized trials in cancer treatment has been criticized for suboptimal non-representative inclusion. In trials, it is unclear how outcomes compare between randomized and nonrandomized patients.

METHODS

At 8 of 16 participant centers, this multicenter observational study identified validation patients, who had been eligible but not randomized during recruitment for the PREOPANC trial. We assessed the accrual proportion, investigated their most common reasons for not participating in the trial, and compared resection rates, radical (R0) resection rates, and overall survival between the validation patients and PREOPANC patients, who had been randomized in the trial to immediate surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 455 patients had been eligible during the recruitment period, 151 of whom (33%) had been randomized. Fifty-five percent of the 304 validation patients had refused to participate. Median overall survival in the validation group was 15.2 months, against 15.5 months in the PREOPANC group (P = 1.00). The respective resection rates (76% vs 73%) and R0 resection rates (51% vs 46%) did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The PREOPANC trial included a reasonable percentage of 33% of eligible patients. In terms of the outcomes survival, resection rate, and R0 resection rate, this appeared to be a representative group.

Long-term nationwide trends in the treatment of and outcomes among pancreatic cancer patients

Whilst treatment modalities for pancreatic cancer patients have evolved in recent years, their impact on outcomes remains relatively unexamined on a national scale. We aimed to analyse changes in overall survival and trends in surgical and oncological treatments in pancreatic cancer patients diagnosed in the periods 2000 through 2008 and 2009 through 2016 in Finland. We collected data for pancreatic cancer patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2016, gathering data from the Finnish national registries on surgeries, oncological treatments and time of death. Follow-up continued through the end of 2018. We compared patients diagnosed between 2000 and 2008 to those diagnosed between 2009 through 2016. Our study comprised 14 712 pancreatic cancer patients. There was no significant change in the national resection rate (8.1% vs 8.0%, p = 0.690). In radical surgery patients, median survival improved from 20 months (95% confidence interval (CI) 18-22) to 28 months (CI 25-31) (p < 0.001), with 1-year survival ranging from 70% to 81%. In the no-surgery group, median survival slightly improved from 3.1 months (CI 3.0-3.3) to 3.3 months (CI 3.1-3.4) (p < 0.001). The proportion of radical surgery patients receiving preoperative oncological treatment increased from 4% to 13% (p < 0.001) and only postoperative treatment from 25% to 47% (p < 0.001). Whilst the resection rate did not increase, the prognosis of pancreatic cancer patients improved, particularly amongst radical surgery patients resulting most likely from the fact that a larger proportion of patients receive more effective oncological treatments.

[Surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer-What is new?]

The incidence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is continuously increasing and will become the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Europe and the USA by 2030. With a 5-year overall survival rate of less than 10% the prognosis remains poor. So far surgical tumor resection remains the only curative treatment option, which is now partially supported by multimodal neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy concepts. Due to the aggressive tumor biology patients with advanced pancreatic cancer in particular can profit from these multimodal therapy concepts. Additionally, in recent years surgical treatment was optimized, the criteria for tumor resectablity were defined and minimally invasive surgery was widely introduced. This review article summarizes the newest developments and the new German S3 guidelines concerning surgery of pancreatic cancer.

Surgical Complications in a Multicenter Randomized Trial Comparing Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy and Immediate Surgery in Patients With Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer (PREOPANC Trial)

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the effect of preoperative chemoradiotherapy on surgical complications in patients after pancreatic resection for (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is increasingly used in patients with (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer. concerns have been raised about the potential harmful effect of any preoperative therapy on the surgical complication rate after pancreatic resection.

METHODS

An observational analysis was performed within the multicenter randomized controlled PREOPANC trial (April 2013-July 2017). The trial randomly assigned (1:1) patients to preoperative chemoradiotherapy followed by surgery and the remaining adjuvant chemotherapy or to immediate surgery, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. The main analysis consisted of a per-protocol approach. The endpoints of the present analyses were the rate of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

This study included 246 patients from 16 centers, of whom 66 patients underwent resection after preoperative therapy and 98 patients after immediate surgery. No differences were found regarding major complications (37.9% vs 30.6%, P=0.400), postpancreatectomy hemorrhage (9.1% vs 5.1%, P=0.352), delayed gastric emptying (21.2% vs 22.4%, P=0.930), bile leakage (4.5% vs 3.1%, P=0.686), intra-abdominal infections (12.1% vs 10.2%, P=0.800), and mortality (3.0% vs 4.1%, P=1.000). There was a significant lower incidence of postoperative pancreatic fistula in patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy (0% vs 9.2%, P=0.011).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy did not increase the incidence of surgical complications or mortality and reduced the rate of postoperative pancreatic fistula after resection in patients with (borderline-)resectable pancreatic cancer.

Location, Location, Location: What Should be Targeted Beyond Gross Disease for Localized Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma? Proposal of a Standardized Clinical Tumor Volume for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Head: The "Triangle Volume"

PURPOSE

In patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma (BRPC/LAPC), local failure rates after resection remain significant, even in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation. Suboptimal local control may relate to variable radiation target delineation, as no consensus exists around clinical tumor volume (CTV) design in this context. In the surgical literature, recent attention has been given to the "triangle" volume (TV) as a source of subclinical, residual disease. To understand whether the TV can inform optimal CTV design, we mapped locoregional failures after resection in a large cohort of patients with BRPC/LAPC and compared locations of failure to the TV.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with BRPC/LAPC of the head or neck diagnosed between 2016 AND 2019 who developed locoregional failure after surgery, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and radiation were identified. Descriptive statistics were generated to report the frequency of locoregional failures located within the TV and the frequency of new vascular involvement at time of failure, compared with vascular involvement at diagnosis. Additionally, dosimetric coverage of the TV with the preoperative radiation plan that had been used was assessed.

RESULTS

In 31 patients who experienced locoregional failure, the centroid of failure was located within the TV in 28 cases (90%). Extent of vascular involvement at time of locoregional failure included vasculature that had not been involved at diagnosis in 13 cases (42%). The preoperative radiation plan that had been used provided a median V33 Gy and V25 Gy of the TV of only 53% (interquartile range, 34%-72%) and 70% (IQR, 48%-85%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The TV encompassed the vast majority of locoregional failures, but dosimetric coverage of the TV was poor when only targeting gross disease and the full circumference of involved vasculature. As such, the TV may better serve as a basis for CTV design in patients with BRPC/LAPC undergoing neoadjuvant radiation.