Meta-analysis of radical resection rates and margin assessment in pancreatic cancer

Clinical outcomes in borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer with the addition of low-dose-rate brachytherapy to standard of care therapy

PURPOSE

Surgical resection remains the only curative therapy for pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately, many patients have borderline or unresectable disease at diagnosis due to proximity of major abdominal vessels. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation are used to down-stage, however, there is a risk that there will be a positive/close surgical margin. The CivaSheet is a low-dose-rate (LDR) brachytherapy device placed at the time of surgery to target the area of highest risk of margin positivity. The purpose of this study is to assess the clinical value of brachytherapy in addition to standard-of-care therapy in pancreatic therapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 2017 and 2022 patients with borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiation followed by surgical resection were included. There were 2 cohorts of patients: (1) Those who had the LDR brachytherapy device placed at the time of surgery and (2) those who did not. Sixteen of 19 (84%) patients who had brachytherapy were enrolled in a prospective clinical trial (NCT02843945). Patients were matched for comorbidities, cancer staging, and treatment details. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were included in this analysis, 19 in the LDR brachytherapy group and 16 in the comparison cohort. The 2-year PFS was 21% vs. 0% (p = 0.11), 2-year OS was 26% vs. 13% (p = 0.43), and the pancreatic cancer cause-specific survival was 84% vs. 56% (p = 0.13) in favor of the brachytherapy patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of LDR brachytherapy at the time of resection shows a trend towards improved progression free and overall survival for patients with borderline or locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemoradiation.

The impact of vascular margin invasion on local recurrence after pancreatoduodenectomy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PADC) still has nowadays a very impaired long-term survival. Most studies are focused on overall survival; however, local recurrence occurs about up to 50% of cases and seems to be highly related with margin resection status. We aim to analyze the impact of vascular resection margins on local recurrence (LR) and to assess its impact on overall and disease-free survival.

METHODS

Eighty out of 191 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy in a university hospital between 2006 and 2021 with PDAC diagnosis were analyzed and vascular margin status specifically addressed. Univariate and multivariate were performed. Time to LR was compared by using the Kaplan-Meier method and prognostic factors assessed using Cox regression hazards model.

RESULTS

LR appeared in 10 (50%) of the overall R1 resections in the venous margin and 9 (60%) in the arterial one. Time to LR was significantly shorter when any margin was overall affected (23.2 vs 44.7 months, p = 0.01) and specifically in the arterial margin involvement (13.7 vs 32.1 months, p = 0.009). Overall R1 resections (HR 2.61, p = 0.013) and a positive arterial margin (HR 2.84, p = 0.012) were associated with local recurrence on univariate analysis, whereas arterial positive margin remained significant on multivariate analysis (HR 2.70, p = 0.031).

CONCLUSIONS

Arterial margin invasion is correlated in our cohort with local recurrence. Given the limited ability to modify this margin intraoperatively, preoperative therapies should be considered to improve local margin clearance.

Prognostic importance of margin clearance in ampullary adenocarcinoma following pancreaticoduodenectomy in a Danish population-based nationwide study

BACKGROUND

In this Danish nationwide population-based study, we evaluated the prognostically relevant minimum tumour-free margin width following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) and evaluated whether certain margins hold independent prognostic information.

METHODS

We included 128 patients who underwent PD for AAC from 2015 to 2019. Clinical and pathological data including well-known prognostic factors were retrieved from the Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database. Missing data were obtained by review of pathology reports and re-microscopy of resection specimens. All PD specimens were examined using a standardised pathological protocol including multicolour inking, axial slicing and exact reporting of margin widths. The cohort was dichotomised into involved and uninvolved groups, using different margin clearance definitions (0.5-≥3.0 mm).

RESULTS

Following PD for AAC, margin clearance of ≥1 mm was independently associated with improved chance of survival compared with <1 mm (HR: 0.30, 95 % CI: 0.14-0.64 (p = 0.002)). Posterior and anterior margin widths were narrower compared with superior mesenteric artery and vein margins. Posterior margin and anterior surface had isolated prognostic significance in multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

Following PD for AAC, margin clearance of at least 1 mm is independently associated with improved survival. Our data further indicate that anterior surface and posterior margin hold particular prognostic value.

Tumor microenvironment crosstalk between tumors and the nervous system in pancreatic cancer: Molecular mechanisms and clinical perspectives

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) exhibits the highest incidence of perineural invasion among all solid tumors. The intricate interplay between tumors and the nervous system plays an important role in PDAC tumorigenesis, progression, recurrence, and metastasis. Various clinical symptoms of PDAC, including anorexia and cancer pain, have been linked to aberrant neural activity, while the presence of perineural invasion is a significant prognostic indicator. The use of conventional neuroactive drugs and neurosurgical interventions for PDAC patients is on the rise. An in-depth exploration of tumor-nervous system crosstalk has revealed novel therapeutic strategies for mitigating PDAC progression and effectively relieving symptoms. In this comprehensive review, we elucidate the regulatory functions of tumor-nervous system crosstalk, provide a succinct overview of the relationship between tumor-nervous system dialogue and clinical symptomatology, and deliberate the current research progress and forthcoming avenues of neural therapy for PDAC.

Vein Wall Invasion Is a More Reliable Predictor of Oncological Outcomes than Vein-Related Margins after Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Early Stages of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with vein resection is the only potentially curative option for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with venous involvement. The aim of our study was to assess the oncological prognostic significance of the different variables of venous involvement in patients undergoing PD for resectable and borderline-resectable with venous-only involvement (BR-V) PDAC. We performed a retrospective analysis of prospectively acquired data over a 10-year period. Of the 372 patients included, 105 (28%) required vein resection and vein wall involvement was identified in 37% of those. A multivariable analysis failed to identify the vein-related resection margins as independent predictors for OS, DFS or LR. Vein wall tumour involvement was an independent predictor of OS (risk x1.7-2) and DFS (risk x1.9-2.2) in all models, while it replaced overall surgical margin positivity as the only parameter independently predicting LR during an analysis of separate resection margins (risk x2.4). Vein wall tumour invasion may be a more reliable predictor of oncological outcomes compared to traditionally reported parameters. Future studies should focus on possible pre-operative investigations that could identify these cases and management pathways that could yield a survival benefit, such as the use of neoadjuvant treatments.

Liquid biopsy after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and its relation to oncological outcomes. Systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

It has been hypothesised that manipulation during surgery releases tumoral components into circulation. We investigate the effect of surgery on plasma-borne DNA biomarkers and the oncological outcomes in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We also compare non-touch isolation techniques (NTIT) with standard techniques.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis of studies analysing liquid biopsy as circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA), circulating tumour cells (CTCs), and messenger RNA (mRNA) in resectable PDAC patients who underwent surgery and its association with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). Research in EMBASE, Web of Science and PubMed was performed. The ctDNA shift negative-to-positive (ctDNA -/+) or ctDNA shift positive-to-negative (ctDNA +/-) before and after surgery was evaluated.

RESULTS

Twelve studies comprising 413 patients were included. Shorter OS and DFS were identified in patients with positive ctDNA status before (HR = 2.28, p = 0.005 and HR = 2.16, p = 0.006) or after surgery (HR = 3.88, p < 0.0001 and HR = 3.81, p = 0.03), respectively. Surgical resection increased the rate of ctDNA +/-. There were no differences in OS or DFS in the ctDNA +/- group compared with ctDNA +/+ or ctDNA -/+. However, there was a trend to shorter OS in the ctDNA -/+ group (HR = 5.00, p = 0.09). No differences between NTIT and standard techniques on liquid biopsy status were found.

CONCLUSION

Positive ctDNA in the perioperative period is associated with a worse prognosis. Surgical resection has a role in the negativisation of liquid biopsy status. More studies are needed to assess the potential of minimally invasive techniques on ctDNA dynamics.

Predicting post-recurrence survival for patients with pancreatic cancer recurrence after primary resection: A Bi-institutional validated risk classification

BACKGROUND

Over 80% of patients will develop disease recurrence after radical resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aims to develop and validate a clinical risk score predicting post-recurrence survival (PRS) at time of recurrence.

METHODS

All patients who had recurrence after undergoing pancreatectomy for PDAC at the Johns Hopkins Hospital or at the Regional Academic Cancer Center Utrecht during the study period were included. Cox proportional hazard model was used to develop the risk model. Performance of the final model was assessed in a test set after internal validation.

RESULTS

Of 718 resected PDAC patients, 72% had recurrence after a median follow-up of 32 months. The median overall survival was 21 months and the median PRS was 9 months. Prognostic factors associated with shorter PRS were age (hazard ratio [HR] 1.02; 95% confidence interval [95%CI] 1.00-1.04), multiple-site recurrence (HR 1.57; 95%CI 1.08-2.28), and symptoms at time of recurrence (HR 2.33; 95%CI 1.59-3.41). Recurrence-free survival longer than 12 months (HR 0.55; 95%CI 0.36-0.83), FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy (HR 0.45; 95%CI 0.25-0.81; HR 0.58; 95%CI 0.26-0.93, respectively) were associated with a longer PRS. The resulting risk score had a good predictive accuracy (C-index: 0.73).

CONCLUSION

This study developed a clinical risk score based on an international cohort that predicts PRS in patients who underwent surgical resection for PDAC. This risk score will become available on www.evidencio.com and can help clinicians with patient counseling on prognosis.

Utility of intraoperative pathology consultations of whipple resection specimens and their impact on final margin status

The resection margin status is a significant surgical prognostic factor for the long-term outcomes of patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (Whipple procedure). As a result, surgeons frequently rely on intraoperative consults (IOCs) involving frozen sections to evaluate margin clearance during these resections. Nevertheless, the impact of this practice on final margin status and long-term outcomes remains a topic of debate. This study aimed to assess the impact of IOCs on the clearance rate of resection margins following Whipple procedure and distal pancreatectomy. A retrospective database review of all patients who underwent Whipple procedure or distal pancreatectomy at our institution between 2018 and 2020 was performed to evaluate the utility of IOCs by gastrointestinal surgeons and its correlation with final postoperative surgical margin status. A significant variation in the frequency of IOC requests for margins among surgeons was noted. However, the use of frozen section analysis for intraoperative margin assessment was not significantly associated with the clearance rate of final post-operative margins. More frequent use of IOC did not result in higher final margin clearance rate, an important prognostic factor following Whipple procedure.

Clinical Efficacy of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with Gemcitabine plus S-1 for Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Compared with Upfront Surgery

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus S-1 (NAC-GS) in the prognosis of patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been reported. NAC-GS is now assumed to be a standard regimen for resectable PDAC in Japan. However, the reason for this improvement in prognosis remains unclear.

METHODS

In 2019, we introduced NAC-GS for resectable PDAC. From 2015 to 2021, 340 patients were diagnosed with resectable PDAC (anatomical and biological [carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 < 500 U/mL]) and were divided according to the treatment period (upfront surgery [UPS] group, 2015-2019, n = 241; NAC-GS group, 2019-2021, n = 80). We used "intention-to-treat" analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of NAC-GS to those of UPS.

RESULTS

Of the 80 patients with NAC-GS, 75 (93.8%) completed two cycles of NAC-GS, and the resection rate of the NAC-GS group was comparable to that of the UPS group (92.5 vs. 91.3%, P = 0.73). The R0 resection rate was significantly higher in the NAC-GS group than in the UPS group (91.3 vs. 82.6%, P = 0.04), even though the surgical burden was smaller. Progression-free survival tended to be better (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.70, P = 0.06), and overall survival was significantly better in the NAC-GS group than in the UPS group (HR 0.55, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC-GS provided improvements in microscopic invasion leading to a high R0 rate and smooth administration and completion of adjuvant therapy, which might lead to an improved prognosis in patients with resectable PDAC.

Prognostic significance of margin clearance in pancreaticoduodenectomy specimens with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a Danish population-based nationwide study

BACKGROUND

In this nationwide population-based cohort study, we investigated the overall minimum margin width that is independently associated with improved survival following pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and evaluated whether certain margins or surfaces hold independent prognostic significance.

METHODS

Data from 367 patients who underwent PD for PDAC in the period 2015-2019 were retrieved from the Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database. Missing data were obtained by review of pathology reports and re-microscopy of resection specimens. Surgical specimens were evaluated using a standardised pathological protocol involving multicolour inking, axial slicing and exact reporting of circumferential margin clearances in 0.5 mm increments.

RESULTS

When categorised according to margin widths of <0.5, <1.0, <1.5, <2.0, <2.5 and <3.0 mm, R1 resections were detected in 34%, 57%, 75%, 78%, 86% and 87% of cases, respectively. In multivariable analyses, an overall margin clearance of ≥1.5 mm was associated with improved survival compared with a clearance of <1.5 mm (HR 0.70 95% CI 0.51-0.97 (p = 0.031)). When evaluating the margins separately, no margin had independent prognostic significance.

CONCLUSION

Margin clearance of at least 1.5 mm was independently associated with improved survival following PD for PDAC.

Peritoneal patch in vascular reconstruction during pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: a single Centre experience

BACKGROUND

Concomitant venous resection during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma with mesenterico-portal vein involvement is increasingly performed to achieve oncological resection. This study aims to report a single centre experience in peritoneal patch (PP) as autologous graft for vascular reconstruction (VR) during PD.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent PD + VR with PP between December 2019 and September 2020 was performed, using a prospective collected database. Postoperative outcome and pathological margins were evaluated. Venous patency was assessed by computed tomography at day 7 and week 12 post surgery.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients underwent PD + VR with PP reconstruction for pancreatic cancer, including one total pancreatectomy. VR consisted of lateral (n = 14) or tubular (n = 1) patch. The median PP length was 30 mm [26.3-33.8] and venous clamping time 30 min [27.5-39.0]. Computed tomography showed a patent VR in 93.3% and 53.3% after 7 days and 12 weeks, respectively; venous patency loss was always asymptomatic. The only postoperative VR-related complication was one mesenteric venous thrombosis. Five other patients experienced VR-unrelated complications: septic shock (n = 3), biliary fistula (n = 1) and post-traumatic subdural hematoma (n = 1). Mortality was nihil. At pathology, R0 resection (≥1 mm) was observed in 40.0% (6/15), venous margin was free in 46.7% (7/15), and venous wall was involved in 40.0% (6/15).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of PP as venous substitute during PD + VR is safe and feasible with an acceptable postoperative morbidity, and a decreased but asymptomatic venous patency after 12 weeks which should question the role of anticoagulation therapy.

Review of Current Systemic Therapy and Novel Systemic Therapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

This review aims to describe the systemic treatment options for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and includes a summary of the current treatments as well as the ongoing clinical trials which may be efficacious in the treatment of this aggressive malignancy.

METHODS

A literature review was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed between August 1996 and February 2023. The reviewed studies are categorized into these categories: current standard of care treatments, targeted therapies, immunotherapy and clinical trials. The current treatment modality for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer is mainly systemic chemotherapy.

RESULTS

The introduction of polychemotherapy regimens including gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel and FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin, irinotecan, folinic acid and fluorouracil) has improved the clinical outcome of advanced pancreatic cancer. For further improvement in clinical outcomes, several novel approaches have been extensively studied in pancreatic cancer. The review discusses the current standard chemotherapy regimen and the novel treatment options in the field.

CONCLUSIONS

While there are novel treatments being explored for metastatic pancreatic, it remains a debilitating and aggressive disease with high mortality that warrants continued efforts to advance therapeutic options.

Current Approaches for the Curative-Intent Surgical Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Radical resection is the only curative treatment for pancreatic cancer. However, only up to 20% of patients are considered eligible for surgical resection at the time of diagnosis. Although upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy has become the gold standard of treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer there are numerous ongoing trials aiming to compare the clinical outcomes of various surgical strategies (e.g., upfront surgery or neoadjuvant treatment with subsequent resection). Neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery is considered the best approach in borderline resectable pancreatic tumors. Individuals with locally advanced disease are now candidates for palliative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy; however, some patients may become eligible for resection during the course of such treatment. When metastases are found, the cancer is qualified as unresectable. It is possible to perform radical pancreatic resection with metastasectomy in selected cases of oligometastatic disease. The role of multi-visceral resection, which involves reconstruction of major mesenteric veins, is well known. Nonetheless, there are some controversies in terms of arterial resection and reconstruction. Researchers are also trying to introduce personalized treatments. The careful, preliminary selection of patients eligible for surgery and other therapies should be based on tumor biology, among other factors. Such selection may play a key role in improving survival rates in patients with pancreatic cancer.

The Impact of Involved Resection Margin on Recurrence and Survival After Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Periampullary Carcinoma, with Emphasis on Pancreatic Head Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The supposed adverse effect of involved resection margin during pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for periampullary carcinoma or pancreatic head carcinoma (CaP) on long-term oncological outcomes is still inconclusive.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study on periampullary carcinoma undergoing PD. Patients with R0 (margin clear) resection were compared to patients with R1 (microscopically directly involved margin) resection. Patients with gross involved margin (R2 resection) were excluded. Long-term oncological outcomes measured included incidence and site of recurrent disease, overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS). A subgroup analysis was made on patients with CaP.

RESULTS

Between January 2003 and December 2019, 203 PD were identified for present study. The incidence of R1 resection was common (12% in periampullary carcinoma and 20% in CaP). In periampullary carcinoma, R1 resection had greater proportion of CaP, lesser proportion of carcinoma of ampulla (CaA), more perineural invasion, more lymph node (LN) metastasis. R1 group had a shorter OS and DFS, but no difference in the incidence and site of recurrent disease. In the subgroup of CaP (91 patients), R1 group did not differ from R0 group except for more LN metastasis. There was no difference in incidence and site of recurrent disease, OS and DFS. On multivariable analysis, R1 resection was not an independent factor for OS and DFS for periampullary carcinoma or for CaP only.

CONCLUSION

Involved resection margin was not uncommon. It was not associated with higher incidence of recurrent disease including local recurrence, and was not an independent prognosticator for OS and DFS.

The impact of resection margin distance on survival and recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a retrospective cohort analysis

BACKGROUND

The prognostic effect of resection margin status following pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial, even with the implementation of standardized pathological assessment. We therefore investigated the impact of resection margin (RM) status and RM distance in curative resected PDAC on overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS) and recurrence.

METHOD

108 patients were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database of a certified pancreatic cancer center. Distribution and relationships between circumferential resection margin (CRM) involvement (CRM≤1mm; CRM>1mm; CRM≥2mm) and their prognostic impact on OS and DFS were assessed using Kaplan-Meier statistics and the Log-Rank test. Multivariate logistic regression was used explain the development of a recurrence 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

63 out of 108 patients had medial RM and 32 posterior RM involvement. There was no significant difference in OS and DFS between CRM≤1mm and CRM>1mm resections. Clearance at the medial margin of ≥2mm had an impact on OS and DFS, (RM≥2mm vs. RM<2mm: median OS 29.8 vs 16.8 months, median DFS 19.6 vs. 10.3 months). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that age, medial RM ≥2mm, lymph node status and chemotherapy were prognostic factors for OS and DFS. Posterior RM had no influence on OS or DFS.

CONCLUSION

Not all RM seem to have the same impact on OS and DFS, and a clearance of 1mm for definition of a negative RM (i.e. CRM>1mm) seems not sufficient. Future studies should include more patients to stratify for potential confounders we could not account for.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered with the German Clinical Trials Registry (reference number DRKS0017425).

Real World Data for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma from a Population-Based Study in France

Pancreatic cancer is associated with high mortality rates, and most cases are diagnosed at advanced stages. This study aimed to evaluate the prognostic factors for survival in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Data from the Finistere registry of digestive database were used in this analysis. This retrospective population-based study included 2117 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed between 2005 and 2019. Cox regression was used to assess the impact of different prognostic factors. The overall median age was 74 (IQR 65.0−81.0). The majority of pancreatic adenocarcinoma 1120 (52.90%) occurred in the head of the pancreas. The type of surgical resection correlated with age (pancreaticoduodenectomy performed in 13.39% of patients aged under 65 years and only 1.49% of patients aged ≥ 80 years). For the entire cohort, 1-year mortality rate after diagnosis was 77.81%. Chemotherapy was associated with better survival for both operated (HR 0.17 95% CI 0.22; 0.64 p < 0.001) and unoperated patients (HR 0.41 95% CI 0.27; 0.61 p < 0.001). Palliative radiotherapy was associated with improved survival (HR 0.69 95% CI 0.56; 0.85 p < 0.001). Among operated patients, the presence of lung metastases (median 34.06; CI 20.06; 34.66) was associated with better survival compared with liver metastases (median 21.10; CI 18.10; 28.96), peritoneal carcinomatosis (median 11.00; CI 8.53; 14.63), or distant metastases (median 15.16; CI 12.66; 18.13) (p = 0.0001). Age, curative surgery, positive lymph nodes, chemotherapy, and palliative radiotherapy were corelated with overall survival. Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment, but less than a quarter of patients were eligible.

Pancreatic head cancer - Current surgery techniques

Pancreatic head cancer is a highly fatal disease. For now, surgery offers the only potential long-term cure albeit with a high risk of complications. However, the progress of surgical technique during the past decade has resulted in 5-year survival approaching 30% after resection and adjuvant chemotherapy. This paper presents current data on the recommended extent of lymphadenectomy, the resection margin, on the definition of resectable and borderline resectable tumors and mesopancreas. Surgical techniques proposed to improve PD are presented: the artery first approach, the uncinate process first, the mesopancreas first approach, the triangle operation, periarterial divestment, and multiorgan resection.

Nationwide trends and outcomes of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer - an analysis of the Swedish national pancreatic cancer registry

OBJECTIVES

During the last decade, neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic cancer has become more frequent. Pathological response and overall survival are promising; however, various post-operative complications have been reported. Our primary aim was to compare the complication scenario of patients receiving NAT in borderline resectable and locally advanced disease with those who had upfront pancreatic surgery (UFS) for primarily resectable cancer.

METHODS

From the Swedish National Pancreatic and Periampullary Cancer Registry, patients resected for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) between 2010 and 2018 were identified. Data on patient characteristics, neoadjuvant therapy, post-operative complications and survival were obtained. Comparisons between groups as well as survival analysis were performed.

RESULTS

Within the total cohort of 13,948 patients, 1894 (median age 69 years, 51% men) were resected for PDAC. Among these, 112 (5.9%) patients received NAT followed by surgery. The patients who received NAT were younger (67 vs 70 years, p < .001), had a lower level of CA19-9 (47 vs 108, p = .001) and had to a larger extent vascular resection (58.9 vs 26.9%, p < .001) and total pancreatectomy performed (23.2 vs 9.1%, p < .001). No difference was found for major post-operative complications and there was no significant change in survival rate between the NAT and UFS groups (median 28 vs 26 months, p = .122).

CONCLUSIONS

When analyzing data from a national registry, no difference in post-operative complications was found between resected patients receiving UFS and NAT for PDAC. Also, the survival was equal between groups. NAT is a feasible treatment option for patients with potentially curable pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for borderline resectable and upfront resectable pancreatic cancer increasing overall survival and disease-free survival?

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most common pancreatic neoplasm. Surgery is the factual curative option, but most patients present with advanced disease. In order to increase resectability, results of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on metastatic disease were extrapolated to the neoadjuvant setting by many centers. The aim of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the outcome of patients who underwent upfront surgery (US)-PDAC and borderline (BR)-PDAC, and those resected after NAC to determine prognostic factors that might affect the outcome in these resected patients.

METHODS

One hundred fifty-one patients between January 2012 and March 2021 in our department were reviewed. Epidemiological characteristics and pre-operative induction treatment were assessed. Pathological reports were analyzed to evaluate the quality of oncological resection (R0/R1). Post-operative mortality and morbidity and survival data were reviewed.

RESULTS

One hundred thirteen patients were addressed for US, and 38 were considered BR and referred for surgery after induction chemotherapy. The pancreatic resection R0 was 71.5% and R1 28.5%. pT3 rate was significantly higher in the US than BR (58,4% vs 34,2%, p= 0.005). The mean OS and DFS rates were 29.4 months 15.9 months respectively. There was no difference between OS and DFS of US vs BR patients. N0 patients had significantly longer OS and DFS (p=<0.001). R0 patients had significantly longer OS (p=0.03) and longer DFS (P=0.08). In the multivariate analysis, the presence of postoperative pancreatic fistula, R1 resection, N+ and not access to adjuvant chemotherapy were bad prognostic factors of OS.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests the benefits of NAC for BR patients in downstaging tumors and rendering them amenable to resection, with same oncological result compared to US.

Prognostic Impact of Resection Margin Status on Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. While surgical resection is the only treatment option with curative intent, most patients die of locoregional and/or distant recurrence. The prognostic impact of the resection margin status has received much attention. However, the evidence is almost exclusively related to pancreatoduodenectomies, while corresponding data for distal pancreatectomy specimens are limited. The key data, such as the rate of microscopic margin involvement (“R1”), the site of margin involvement, and the impact of R1 on patient outcome, are divergent between studies and do not currently allow any general conclusions. The main reasons for the variability in the published data are the small size of the study cohorts and their heterogeneity, as well as the marked divergence in pathology examination practices. The latter is a consequence of the lack of concrete guidance, both for grossing and microscopic examination. The increasing administration of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy introduces a further factor of uncertainty as the conventional definition of a tumour-free margin (“R0”) based on 1 mm clearance is inadequate for these specimens. This review discusses the published data regarding the prognostic impact of margin status in distal pancreatectomy specimens along with the challenges and uncertainties that are related to the assessment of the margins.

The Future Perspectives of Redefining the Resection Margin Status in Different Cancers of Pancreas

Background: The interest towards the assessment of circumferential resection margins(CRM) in pancreatic cancers has been evolving over last years. Whilst several studies investigated the influence of R1-resections on survival, not many studies evaluated the prognostic value of each resection margin. In this study, we examined the different resection margins to better understand their prognostic implications on overall survival. Methods: This prospective study included a cohort of patients who had pancreaticoduodenectomy for cancer purposes at our institution from 2008 till 2013. Median follow-up was 6 years. Involved margins in R1-resections were further classified into anatomical margins (anterior, posterior and circumferential margins) and surgical margins (vascular/medial margins and transection margins). Overall survival was assessed for each specific resection margin. Results: 134 patients were included with median age 66 years. R1-resection was done in 54% of patients(n=72/134). Median survival of R0-resection group was 6.3 years, compared to 1.9 years for R1-resection group(p-value 0.001). Vascular (surgical) margins had the lowest survival rate (1.7years) compared to anatomical margins (anterior, posterior and circumferential margins) with 3.6, 2.2 and 2.1 years respectively (p-value 0.02). On multivariate analysis; lymph node involvement and vascular resection were the only factors to correlate significantly with poor survival. Conclusion: Whilst the new pathological protocols advised to perform rigorous margin assessment of CRM, the prognostic value of each resection margin is still unclear. This study  showed variation of survival across different resection margins with inferiority towards vascular (surgical) margins. This supported the need of redefining R1-margins in the future pathological classifications according to their different prognostic impacts.

Tumour Size and T-Stage in Pancreatic Cancer Resection Specimens Depend on the Pathology Examination Approach

In the eighth edition of the TNM classification for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), stages T1 to T3 are defined by tumour size, size measurement being deemed objective and accurate. This study investigated whether various, currently used approaches to tumour measurement result in different tumour sizes and differences in T-stage assignment. In a series of 315 resected PDAC, tumour sizes were measured as follows: macroscopically in a single or in two perpendicular planes and with or without microscopic corroboration. Comparison of the resulting tumour sizes showed that both macroscopic measurement in two planes and microscopic corroboration gave significantly different results (p < 0.001). Compared to the most simple approach (macroscopic measurement in one plane), the comprehensive approach (macroscopic measurement in two planes with microscopic corroboration) resulted in a larger tumour size in 263 (83%) cases (mean absolute size difference: 10 mm; mean relative size change: 36%). T-stage assignment differed in 142 (45%) cases between the simple and comprehensive approach and affected 87%, 38% and 48% of the cases deemed to be stage T1, T2 and T3, respectively. In conclusion, tumour size and T-stage are highly approach-dependent. Consensus on an accurate method is required to ensure comparability of these basic data.

Imaging Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer Resectability After Neoadjuvant Therapy: AJR Expert Panel Narrative Review

Despite important innovations in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), PDAC remains a disease with poor prognosis and high mortality. A key area for potential improvement in the management of PDAC, aside from earlier detection in patients with treatable disease, is the improved ability of imaging techniques to differentiate treatment response after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) from worsening disease. It is well established that current imaging techniques cannot reliably make this distinction. This narrative review provides an update on the imaging assessment of pancreatic cancer resectability after NAT. Current definitions of borderline resectable PDAC, as well as implications for determining likely patient benefit from NAT, are described. Challenges associated with PDAC pathologic evaluation and surgical decision making that are of relevance to radiologists are discussed. Also explored are the specific limitations of imaging in differentiating the response after NAT from stable or worsening disease, including issues relating to protocol optimization, tumor size assessment, vascular assessment, and liver metastasis detection. The roles of MRI as well as PET and/or hybrid imaging are considered. Finally, a short PDAC reporting template is provided for use after NAT. The highlighted methods seek to improve radiologists' assessment of PDAC treatment response after NAT.

Prognostic relevance of the revised R status definition in pancreatic cancer: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The prognostic impact of margin status is reported with conflicting results after pancreatic cancer resection. While some studies validated an uninvolved resection margin (R0) 1 mm or more of tumour clearance, others have failed to show benefit. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of margin definitions on median overall survival (OS).

METHODS

MEDLINE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies reporting associations between resection margins and OS between 2010 and 2021. Data regarding margin status (R0 circumferential resection margin (CRM) negative (CRM-), R0 CRM positive (CRM+), R0 direct, and R1 and OS were extracted. Hazard ratios (HRs) were pooled with a random-effects model. The risk of bias was evaluated with the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool.

RESULTS

The full texts of 774 studies were screened. In total, 21 studies compromising 6056 patients were included in the final synthesis. In total, 188 (24 per cent) studies were excluded due to missing margin definitions. The R0 (CRM+) rate was 50 per cent (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 0.40 to 0.61) and the R0 (CRM-) rate was 38 per cent (95 per cent c.i. 0.29 to 0.47). R0 (CRM-) resection was independently associated with improved OS compared to combined R1 and R0 (CRM+; HR 1.36, 95 per cent c.i. 1.23 to 1.56).

CONCLUSION

The revised R status was confirmed as an independent prognosticator compared to combined R0 (CRM+) and R1. The limited number of studies, non-standardized pathology protocols, and the varying number of margins assessed hamper comparability.

Impact of prior biliary stenting on diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound for mesenteric vascular staging in patients with head of pancreas and periampullary malignancy

OBJECTIVE

The diagnostic performance of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) for stratification of head of pancreas and periampullary tumours into resectable, borderline resectable and locally advanced tumours is unclear as is the effect of endobiliary stents. The primary aim of the study was to assess the diagnostic performance of EUS for resectability according to stent status.

DESIGN

A retrospective study was performed. All patients presenting with a solid head of pancreas mass who underwent EUS and surgery with curative intent during an 8-year period were included. Factors with possible impact on diagnostic performance of EUS were analysed using logistic regression.

RESULTS

Ninety patients met inclusion criteria and formed the study group. A total of 49 (54%) patients had an indwelling biliary stent at the time of EUS, of which 36 were plastic and 13 were self-expanding metal stents (SEMS). Twenty patients underwent venous resection and reconstruction (VRR). Staging was successfully performed in 100% unstented cases, 97% plastic stent and 54% SEMS, p<0.0001. In successfully staged patients, sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for classification of resectability were 70%, 70%, 70%, 42% and 88%. For vascular involvement (VI), sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, PPV and NPV were 80%, 68%, 69%, 26% and 96%. Increasing tumour size OR 0.53 (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.95) was associated with a decrease in accuracy of VI classification.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS has modest diagnostic performance for stratification of staging. Staging was less likely to be completed when a SEMS was in situ. Staging EUS should ideally be performed before endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and biliary drainage.

Landmark Series: Importance of Pancreatic Resection Margins

An important goal of cancer surgery is to achieve negative surgical margins and remove all disease completely. For pancreatic neoplasms, microscopic margins may remain positive despite gross removal of the palpable mass, and surgeons must then consider extending resection, even to the point of completion pancreatectomy, an option that renders the patient with significant adverse effects related to exocrine and endocrine insufficiency. Counterintuitively, extending resection to ensure clear margins may not improve patient outcome. Furthermore, the goal of improving survival by extending the resection may not be achieved, as an initial positive margin may indicate more aggressive underlying tumor biology. There is a growing body of literature on this topic, and this landmark series review will examine the key publications that guide our management for resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Pancreatic fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation in surgical specimens associated with survival in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), one of the most lethal malignancies, is increasing in incidence. However, the stromal reaction pathophysiology and its role in PDAC development remain unknown. We, therefore, investigated the potential role of histological chronic pancreatitis findings and chronic inflammation on surgical PDAC specimens and disease-specific survival (DSS).

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2016, we retrospectively enrolled 236 PDAC patients treated with curative-intent pancreatic surgery at Helsinki University Hospital. All pancreatic transection margin slides were re-reviewed and histological findings were evaluated applying international guidelines.

RESULTS

DSS among patients with no fibrosis, acinar atrophy or chronic inflammation identified on pathology slides was significantly better than DSS among patients with fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation [median survival: 41.8 months, 95% confidence interval (CI) 26.0-57.6 vs. 20.6 months, 95% CI 10.3-30.9; log-rank test p = 0.001]. Multivariate analysis revealed that Ca 19-9 > 37 kU/l [hazard ratio (HR) 1.48, 95% CI 1.02-2.16], lymph node metastases N1-2 (HR 1.71, 95% CI 1.16-2.52), tumor size > 30 mm (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.08), the combined effect of fibrosis and acinar atrophy (HR 1.91, 95% CI 1.27-2.88) and the combined effect of fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation (HR 1.63, 95% CI 1.03-2.58) independently served as unfavorable prognostic factors for DSS. However, we observed no significant associations between tumor size (> 30 mm) and the degree of perilobular fibrosis (p = 0.655), intralobular fibrosis (p = 0.587), acinar atrophy (p = 0.584) or chronic inflammation (p = 0.453).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that the pancreatic stroma is associated with PDAC patients' DSS. Additionally, the more severe the fibrosis, acinar atrophy and chronic inflammation, the worse the impact on DSS, thereby warranting further studies investigating stroma-targeted therapies.

Update on optimal management for pancreatic cancer: expert perspectives from members of the Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group (AGITG) with invited international faculty

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer remains a challenging malignancy due to the high proportion of patients diagnosed at advanced stages and the limited treatment options. This article discusses recent evidence in the management of both localized and advanced pancreatic cancer and offers an expert opinion on current best practice.

AREAS COVERED

For patients with localized disease, the evidence for adjuvant chemotherapy is discussed as well as emerging neoadjuvant approaches for resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced disease. Advances in metastatic disease are discussed including cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted therapies, and the role of genomic testing to identify patients with molecular alterations. Reviewed literature included journal publications, abstracts presented at major international oncology meetings, and ongoing clinical trials databases.

EXPERT OPINION

Pancreatic cancer is a devastating diagnosis and despite recent advances has a very poor prognosis. Only a minority of patients, 20%, are diagnosed with potentially curable disease. The shifting paradigm toward neoadjuvant therapy may improve resectability and survival rates; however, robust evidence is required. Thus far, there has only been limited progress in advanced stage disease. Genomic testing may potentially identify more treatment targets although limited to small subgroups.

Oncologic outcomes according to the location and status of resection margin in pancreas head cancer: role of radiation therapy in R1 resection

Purpose

The clinical significance of margin status in pancreatic head cancer is still controversial due to the nonstandardized definition of R status and pathologic reporting. This study aims to evaluate the impact of the margin status including location and the role of radiation therapy in pancreatic head cancer.

Methods

A total of 314 patients who underwent curative-intent surgery for pancreatic head cancer between 2010 and 2017 were analyzed. Demographics, survival, and local recurrences were compared according to 2 definitions: 0-mm R1 as direct involvement and 1-mm R1 as close resection margin less than 1 mm. The specific margins were divided into 4 groups according to the location around the pancreas: pancreas transection, anterior surface, posterior surface, and vessel (superior mesenteric artery/superior mesenteric vein) margin.

Results

The 0-mm R1-rate was 15.6%, and increased to 36.3% in 1-mm R1. The median overall survival rate of 0-mm R0 vs. R1 was 26 months vs. 16 months (P = 0.052) and that of 1-mm R0 vs. R1 was 27 months vs. 18 months, respectively (P = 0.016). In individual margins, posterior, anterior surface, and pancreas transection margin involvement were associated with poor outcome, and the 1 mm posterior surface involvement was an independent risk factor for disease-free survival (hazard ratio, 1.63). Adjuvant radiation therapy had oncologic benefits, especially in R1 patients (P = 0.011) compared to R0 patients (P = 0.088).

Conclusion

Margin status, especially 1-mm R1 status is an important predictive factor, and involved posterior surface has a clinical impact. Patients with positive margins should be considered adjuvant radiation therapy.

Elderly Patients with Nondistant Metastatic Pancreatic Head Adenocarcinoma Cannot Benefit from More Radical Surgery

BACKGROUND

The incidence of pancreatic cancer continues to rise globally, with pancreatic head cancer accounting for nearly 60-70%. Pancreatic head cancer occurs mainly in people over the age of 60, and its morbidity and mortality increase with age. We investigated whether these elderly patients with nondistant metastases would benefit more from expanded pancreaticoduodenectomy (EPD) compared with standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (SPD).

METHODS

3317 elderly patients with pancreatic head cancer from the SEER database were included in the study based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. These patients were divided into a nonsurgical group and surgical group (including EPD and SPD). Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were applied to identify the independent risk factors for cancer-specific survival (CSS). The survival differences between the nonsurgical group and surgical group were compared. Propensity score matching (PSM) methods were applied to balance covariates and reduce the interference of confounding variables. The two groups of patients were matched in a 1 : 1 ratio, and the covariates between the two groups were compared to verify the matching validity. The survival difference in different groups was compared after the matching analysis.

RESULTS

3317 enrolled patients were divided into the surgical group (n = 984) and nonsurgical group (n = 2333). Before PSM, there were significant differences in overall survival (OS) and CSS between the nonsurgical group and surgical group (median OS: 8 months vs. 20 months, P < 0.001; median CSS: 8 months vs. 22 months, P < 0.001). The multivariate CSS Cox regression analysis demonstrated surgery is an independent risk factor. However, no significant differences were founded between the SPD and EPD groups (median OS: 20 months vs. 22 months, P=0.636; median CSS: 22 months vs. 22 months, P=0.270). After PSM, there were also no significant differences in OS and CSS between the SPD and EPD groups (median OS: 23 months vs. 18 months, P=0.415; median CSS: 26 months vs. 18 months, P=0.329).

CONCLUSION

This study uses PSM to evaluate the effects of EPD and SPD for elderly patients with nondistant metastatic pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. It found that surgery is an independent prognostic factor, but expanded surgery has no survival advantage for these patients, whereas SPD provides a better survival advantage than EPD. SPD is a reasonable treatment option for these patients.

Pathology reporting of margin status in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: challenges and uncertainties

Chemo(radio)therapy is becoming the new standard for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In case of tumor regression on imaging, surgical resection can be undertaken, albeit often with the need for extended procedures. Reevaluation of the current routine pathology procedures is required to establish the appropriate histopathological approach of the resulting specimens. This review focusses on margin status, which is universally considered a core data item of the pathology report, of relevance to both the management of the individual patient and the evaluation of the result of surgery in this particular patient group. As explained in this review, due to the cytoreductive effect of neoadjuvant therapy, the conventional definition of a tumor-free margin ("R0") based on 1 mm clearance is not adequate. Furthermore, the complexity of many of the specimens following extended or multivisceral en bloc surgical resection make margin assessment challenging. These large specimens require extensive sampling, which is not always easily implemented in daily practice. At present, there is marked divergence in pathology practice, and consequently, neither the true R0-rate nor the exact prognostic effect of the margin status have been definitively established for resected locally advanced pancreatic cancer. A concerted effort towards uniform and optimal margin assessment is unfortunately still lacking.

Minimally invasive versus open distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (DIPLOMA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Recently, the first randomized trials comparing minimally invasive distal pancreatectomy (MIDP) with open distal pancreatectomy (ODP) for non-malignant and malignant disease showed a 2-day reduction in time to functional recovery after MIDP. However, for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), concerns have been raised regarding the oncologic safety (i.e., radical resection, lymph node retrieval, and survival) of MIDP, as compared to ODP. Therefore, a randomized controlled trial comparing MIDP and ODP in PDAC regarding oncological safety is warranted. We hypothesize that the microscopically radical resection (R0) rate is non-inferior for MIDP, as compared to ODP.

Methods/design

DIPLOMA is an international randomized controlled, patient- and pathologist-blinded, non-inferiority trial performed in 38 pancreatic centers in Europe and the USA. A total of 258 patients with an indication for elective distal pancreatectomy with splenectomy because of proven or highly suspected PDAC of the pancreatic body or tail will be randomly allocated to MIDP (laparoscopic or robot-assisted) or ODP in a 1:1 ratio. The primary outcome is the microscopically radical resection margin (R0, distance tumor to pancreatic transection and posterior margin ≥ 1 mm), which is assessed using a standardized histopathology assessment protocol. The sample size is calculated with the following assumptions: 5% one-sided significance level (α), 80% power (1-β), expected R0 rate in the open group of 58%, expected R0 resection rate in the minimally invasive group of 67%, and a non-inferiority margin of 7%. Secondary outcomes include time to functional recovery, operative outcomes (e.g., blood loss, operative time, and conversion to open surgery), other histopathology findings (e.g., lymph node retrieval, perineural- and lymphovascular invasion), postoperative outcomes (e.g., clinically relevant complications, hospital stay, and administration of adjuvant treatment), time and site of disease recurrence, survival, quality of life, and costs. Follow-up will be performed at the outpatient clinic after 6, 12, 18, 24, and 36 months postoperatively.

Discussion

The DIPLOMA trial is designed to investigate the non-inferiority of MIDP versus ODP regarding the microscopically radical resection rate of PDAC in an international setting.

Trial registration

ISRCTN registry ISRCTN44897265. Prospectively registered on 16 April 2018.

Neoadjuvant treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma is associated with higher R0 rate compared to upfront surgery

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) is debated for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). This retrospective study assessed the impact of NAT on R0 rate and survival for BRPC patients in comparison with upfront surgery (US).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between 2010 and 2017 patient records for all consecutive patients treated for BRPC according to NCCN 2017 were reviewed. The endpoints analysed were R0 rate, recurrence-free-survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients were included: 63 (79.7%) patients received NAT and 16 (20.3%) were upfront operated. NAT consisted in FOLFIRINOX (median cycles: 5, range 4-8) followed by chemoradiation (n = 55, 87.3%, median dose: 54 Gy). Thirty-nine (61.9%) patients had resection. R0 rate was higher in the NAT group considering a margin clearance of 0 mm (94.9%) or 1 mm (89.7%) compared to the US group (68.8% and 43.8% respectively). In the whole population, median RFS was 12.6 [95%CI: 10.5-22.1] in the NAT group vs 7.7 [95%CI: 4.4-14] months in the US group (p < 0.01). Median OS was 29.0 [95%CI: 23.5-63.1] and 27.2 [95%CI: 11.6-38.8] months in the NAT and US groups respectively (p = 0.06). In operated patients the NAT group achieved better RFS and OS than the US group (p < 0.01 for both). In multivariate analysis NAT, surgical resection and age <65 (p < 0.01 for both) were prognostic of RFS. NAT, surgical resection and adjuvant chemotherapy were prognostic of OS (p < 0.05 for all). In operated patients (n = 55) multivariate analysis showed that N1 status was associated with decreased RFS; age < 65 and NAT were associated with a longer RFS. Receiving a NAT, an adjuvant chemotherapy and achieving a ypT0-1N0 status were associated with better OS. NAT was well tolerated with 14.3% grade ≥ 3 toxicities.

CONCLUSION

NAT permitted a high R0 rate with a 0- or 1-mm clearance margin and was associated with better RFS and OS for patients with BRPC.

Axial slicing versus bivalving in the pathological examination of pancreatoduodenectomy specimens (APOLLO): a multicentre randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

In pancreatoduodenectomy specimens, dissection method may affect the assessment of primary tumour origin (i.e. pancreatic, distal bile duct or ampullary adenocarcinoma), which is primarily determined macroscopically. This is the first study to prospectively compare the two commonly used techniques, i.e. axial slicing and bivalving.

METHODS

In four centres, a randomized controlled trial was performed in specimens of patients with a suspected (pre)malignant tumour in the pancreatic head. Primary outcome measure was the level of certainty (scale 0-100) regarding tumour origin by four independent gastrointestinal pathologists based on macroscopic assessment. Secondary outcomes were inter-observer agreement and R1 rate.

RESULTS

In total, 128 pancreatoduodenectomy specimens were randomized. The level of certainty in determining the primary tumour origin did not differ between axial slicing and bivalving (mean score 72 [sd 13] vs. 68 [sd 16], p = 0.21), nor did inter-observer agreement, both being moderate (kappa 0.45 vs. 0.47). In pancreatic cancer specimens, R1 rate (60% vs. 55%, p = 0.71) and the number of harvested lymph nodes (median 16 vs. 17, p = 0.58) were similar.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated no differences in determining the tumour origin between axial slicing and bivalving. Both techniques performed similarly regarding inter-observer agreement, R1 rate, and lymph node harvest.

Dataset for the reporting of carcinoma of the exocrine pancreas: recommendations from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Current guidelines for the pathology reporting on pancreatic cancer differ in certain aspects, resulting in divergent reporting practice and a lack of comparability of data. Here we report on a new international dataset for the pathology reporting of resection specimens with cancer of the exocrine pancreas (ductal adenocarcinoma and acinar cell carcinoma). The dataset was produced under the auspices of the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR), a global alliance of major (inter-)national pathology and cancer organisations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

According to the ICCR's rigorous process for dataset development, an international expert panel consisting of pancreatic pathologists, a pancreatic surgeon and an oncologist produced a set of core and non-core data items based on a critical review and discussion of current evidence. Commentary was provided for each data item to explain the rationale for selecting it as a core or non-core element, its clinical relevance, and to highlight potential areas of disagreement or lack of evidence, in which case a consensus position was formulated. Following international public consultation, the document was finalised and ratified, and the dataset, which includes a synoptic reporting guide, was published on the ICCR website.

CONCLUSIONS

This first international dataset for cancer of the exocrine pancreas is intended to promote high quality, standardised pathology reporting. Its widespread adoption will improve consistency of reporting, facilitate multidisciplinary communication and enhance comparability of data, all of which will help to improve the management of pancreatic cancer patients.

Prognostic Impact of Resection Margin Status in Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Background

Resection margin status is considered one of the few surgeon-controlled parameters affecting prognosis in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). While studies mostly focus on resection margins in pancreatoduodenectomy, little is known about their role in distal pancreatectomy (DP). This study aimed to investigate resection margins in DP for PDAC.

Methods

Patients who underwent DP for PDAC between October 2004 and February 2020 were included (n = 124). Resection margins and associated parameters were studied in two consecutive time periods during which different pathology examination protocols were used: non-standardized (period 1: 2004–2014) and standardized (period 2: 2015–2020). Microscopic margin involvement (R1) was defined as ≤1 mm clearance.

Results

Laparoscopic and open resections were performed in 117 (94.4%) and 7 (5.6%) patients, respectively. The R1 rate for the entire cohort was 73.4%, increasing from 60.4% in period 1 to 83.1% in period 2 (p = 0.005). A significantly higher R1 rate was observed for the posterior margin (35.8 vs. 70.4%, p < 0.001) and anterior pancreatic surface (based on a 0 mm clearance; 18.9 vs. 35.4%, p = 0.045). Pathology examination period, poorly differentiated PDAC, and vascular invasion were associated with R1 in the multivariable model. Extended DP, positive anterior pancreatic surface, lymph node ratio, perineural invasion, and adjuvant chemotherapy, but not R1, were significant prognostic factors for overall survival in the entire cohort.

Conclusions

Pathology examination is a key determinant of resection margin status following DP for PDAC. A high R1 rate is to be expected when pathology examination is meticulous and standardized. Involvement of the anterior pancreatic surface affects prognosis.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-10464-6.

[Surgery for periampullary pancreatic cancer]

Periampulläre Neoplasien sind eine heterogene Gruppe verschiedener Tumorentitäten der periampullären Region, von denen das Pankreasadenokarzinom mit 60–70 % am häufigsten ist. Wie typisch für Pankreaskarzinome zeichnen sich periampulläre Pankreaskarzinome durch ein aggressives Wachstum und eine frühe systemische Progression aus. Aufgrund ihrer besonderen Lage in unmittelbarer Nähe zur Papilla Vateri treten Symptome in eher früherem Tumorstadium auf, sodass die Therapiemöglichkeiten und Prognose insgesamt günstiger sind als bei Pankreaskarzinomen anderer Lokalisation. Trotzdem unterscheiden sich die Therapieprinzipien bei periampullären Pankreaskarzinomen nicht wesentlich von den Standards bei Pankreaskarzinomen anderer Lokalisation. Ein potenziell kurativer Therapieansatz beim nichtmetastasierten periampullären Pankreaskarzinom ist multimodal und besteht aus der Durchführung einer partiellen Duodenopankreatektomie als radikale onkologische Resektion in Kombination mit einer systemischen, meist adjuvant verabreichten Chemotherapie. Bei Patienten mit günstigen prognostischen Faktoren kann hierdurch ein Langzeitüberleben erzielt werden. Zudem wurden mit der Weiterentwicklung der Chirurgie und Systemtherapie auch potenziell kurative Therapiekonzepte für fortgeschrittene, früher irresektable Tumoren etabliert, welche nun nach Durchführung einer neoadjuvanten Therapie oft einer Resektion zugeführt werden können. In diesem Beitrag werden die aktuellen chirurgischen Prinzipien der radikalen onkologischen Resektion periampullärer Pankreaskarzinome im Kontext der multimodalen Therapie dargestellt und ein Ausblick auf mögliche künftige Entwicklungen der Therapie gegeben.

What do surgeons need to know about the mesopancreas

BACKGROUND

Pancreatoduodenectomy is the only treatment with a promise of cure for patients with pancreatic head adenocarcinoma, and a negative resection margin is an important factor related to overall survival. Complete clearance of the medial margin with removal of the so-called mesopancreas may decrease the recurrence rate after pancreatic resection. Here, we present some important information about the mesopancreas, total mesopancreas excision, and technical aspects to achieve negative resection margins. The area named mesopancreas is defined as the tissue located between the head of the pancreas and the superior mesenteric vessels and the celiac axis and consists of the nerve plexus, lymphatic tissue, and connective tissue. The superior mesenteric and celiac arteries define the border of the mesopancreas. En bloc resection of anterior and posterior pancreatoduodenal nodes, hepatoduodenal nodes, along the superior mesenteric artery nodes, pyloric nodes, and nodes along the common hepatic artery is necessary.

CONCLUSIONS

Improved knowledge of the surgical anatomy of the region and technical refinements of excision of the mesopancreas along with standardized pathological examination are important to increase and to determine radical resection of pancreatic head cancer.

Management of Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Results of an International Survey of Current Practice

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to investigate surgeon preferences for the management of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

BACKGROUND

Select patients with LAPC may become candidates for curative resection following neoadjuvant therapy, and recent reports of survival are encouraging. Yet the optimal management approach remains unclear.

METHODS

An extensive electronic survey was systematically distributed by email to an international cohort of pancreas surgeons. Data collected included practice characteristics, management preferences, attitudes regarding contraindications to surgery, and 6 clinical vignettes of patients that ultimately received a margin negative resection (with detailed videos of post-neoadjuvant imaging) to assess propensity for surgical exploration if resection status is not known.

RESULTS

A total of 153 eligible responses were received from 4 continents. Median duration of practice is 12 years (interquartile range 6-20) and 77% work in a university setting. Most surgeons (86%) are considered high volume (>10 resections/yr), 33% offer a minimally-invasive approach, and 50% offer arterial resections in select patients. Most (72%) always recommend neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and 65% prefer FOLFIRINOX. Preferences for the duration of chemotherapy varied widely: 39% prefer ≥2 months, 43% prefer ≥4 months, and 11% prefer ≥6 months. Forty-one percent frequently recommend neoadjuvant radiotherapy, and 53% prefer 5 to 6 weeks of chemoradiation. The proportion of surgeons favoring exploration following neoadjuvant varied extensively across 5 vignettes of LAPC, from 14% to 53%. In a vignette of oligometastatic liver metastases, 31% would offer exploration if a favorable therapy response is observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In an international cohort of pancreas surgeons, there is substantial variation in management preferences, perceived contraindications to surgery, and the propensity to consider exploration in LAPC. These results emphasize the importance of a robust and nuanced multidisciplinary discussion for each patient, and suggest an evolving concept of "resectability."

Curing pancreatic cancer

The distinct biology of pancreatic cancer with aggressive and early invasive tumor cells, a tumor promoting microenvironment, late diagnosis, and high therapy resistance poses major challenges on clinicians, researchers, and patients. In current clinical practice, a curative approach for pancreatic cancer can only be offered to a minority of patients and even for those patients, the long-term outcome is grim. This bitter combination will eventually let pancreatic cancer rise to the second leading cause of cancer-related mortalities. With surgery being the only curative option, complete tumor resection still remains the center of pancreatic cancer treatment. In recent years, new developments in neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment have emerged. Together with improved perioperative care including complication management, an increasing number of patients have become eligible for tumor resection. Basic research aims to further increase these numbers by new methods of early detection, better tumor modelling and personalized treatment options. This review aims to summarize the current knowledge on clinical and biologic features, surgical and non-surgical treatment options, and the improved collaboration of clinicians and basic researchers in pancreatic cancer that will hopefully result in more successful ways of curing pancreatic cancer.

A Critical Assessment of Postneoadjuvant Therapy Pancreatic Cancer Regression Grading Schemes With a Proposal for a Novel Approach

Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal tumor response score (TRS) system to assess regression in pancreatic cancers resected after neoadjuvant therapy. We developed a novel TRS (Royal North Shore [RNS] system) based on estimating the percentage of tumor bed occupied by viable cancer and categorized into 3 tiers: grade 1 (≤10%), grade 2 (11% to 75%), and grade 3 (>75%). We assessed 147 resected carcinomas with this and other TRS systems (College of American Pathologists [CAP], MD Anderson Cancer Center [MDACC], and Evans). The 3-tiered RNS system predicted median survival after surgery for grades 1, 2, and 3 of 54, 23, and 9 months, respectively (P<0.05). The CAP, MDACC, and Evans systems also predicted survival (P<0.05) but less consistently. The median survival for MDACC and CAP grade 0 (complete regression) was less than MDACC grade 1 and CAP grades 1 and 2. There was no difference in survival between CAP grades 2 and 3 (P=0.960), Evans grades 1 and 2a (P=0.395), and Evans grades 2a and 2b (P=0.587). Interobserver concordance was weak for CAP (κ=0.431), moderate for MDACC (κ=0.691), minimal for Evans (κ=0.307), and moderate to strong for RNS (κ=0.632 to 0.84). Of age, sex, size, stage, grade, perineural and vascular invasion, extrapancreatic extension, margin status, and RNS score, only RNS score, vascular invasion, and extrapancreatic extension predicted survival in univariate analysis. Only extrapancreatic extension (P=0.034) and RNS score (P<0.0001) remained significant in multivariate analysis. We conclude that the RNS system is a reproducible and powerful predictor of survival after resection for pancreatic cancers treated with neoadjuvant therapy and should be investigated in larger cohorts.

What Should Guide the Performance of Venous Resection During Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma with Venous Contact?

Complete surgical resection, most often associated with perioperative chemotherapy, is the only way to offer a chance of cure for patients with pancreatic cancer. One of the most important factors in determining survival outcome that can be influenced by the surgeon is the R0 resection. However, the proximity of mesenteric vessels in cephalic pancreatic tumors, especially the mesenterico-portal venous axis, results in an increased risk of vein involvement and/or the presence of malignant cells in the venous bed margin. A concomitant venous resection can be performed to decrease the risk of a positive margin. Given the additional technical difficulty that this implies, many surgeons seek a path between the tumor and the vein, hoping for the absence of tumor infiltration into the perivascular tissue on pathologic analysis, particularly in cases with administration of neoadjuvant therapy. The definition of optimal surgical margin remains a subject of debate, but at least 1 mm is an independent predictor of survival after pancreatic cancer surgical resection. Although preoperative radiologic assessment is essential for accurate planning of a pancreatic resection, intraoperative decision-making with regard to resection of the mesenterico-portal vein in tumors with a venous contact remains unclear and variable. Although venous histologic involvement and perivascular infiltration are not accurately predictable preoperatively, clinicians must examine the existing criteria and normograms to guide their surgical management according to the integration of new imaging techniques, preoperative chemotherapy use, tumor biology and molecular histopathology, and surgical techniques.

In the Era of the Leeds Protocol: A Systematic Review and A Meta-Analysis on the Effect of Resection Margins on Survival Among Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

A positive resection margin is considered to be a factor associated with poor prognosis after pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection. However, analysis of the resection margin is dependent on the pathological slicing technique. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to study the impact of resection margin on the survival of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients whose specimens were analyzed using the axial slicing technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A systematic search in the PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase datasets covering the time period from November 2006 to January 2019 was performed. Only studies with axial slicing technique (Leeds Pathology Protocol or Royal College of Pathology Protocol) were included in the final database. Meta-analysis between the marginal distance and survival was performed with the Inverse Variance Method in RevMan.

RESULTS

The systematic search resulted in nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria. The median survival for a resection margin 0 mm ranged from 12.3 to 23.4 months, for resection margin <0.5 mm 16 months, for resection margin <1 mm ranged from 11 to 27.5 months, for resection margin <1.5 mm ranged from 16.9 to 21.2 months, and for resection margin >2 mm ranged from 53.9 to 63.1 months. Five studies were eligible for meta-analysis. The pooled multivariable hazard ratio favored resection margin ⩾1 mm (hazard ratio: 1.32 and 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.68, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Resection margins ⩾1 mm seem to lead to better survival in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients than resection margin <1 mm. However, there is not enough data to evaluate the effect of oncologic therapy or to analyze the impact of other resection margin distances on survival.

R Status is a Relevant Prognostic Factor for Recurrence and Survival After Pancreatic Head Resection for Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The prognostic role of resection margins in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is debated. This study aimed to investigate the impact that global and individual resection margin status after pancreatic head resection for PDAC has on disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS).

METHODS

Surgical specimens of pancreaticoduodenectomy/total pancreatectomy performed for PDAC were examined with a standardized protocol. Surgical margin status (biliary, pancreatic neck, duodenal, anterior and posterior pancreatic, superior mesenteric vein groove and superior mesenteric artery margins) was classified as the presence of malignant cells (1) directly at the inked surface (R1 direct), (2) within less than 1 mm (R1 ≤ 1 mm), or (3) with a distance greater than 1 mm (R0). Patients with a positive neck margin at the final histology were excluded from the study.

RESULTS

Of the 362 patients included in the study, 179 patients (49.4 %) had an R0 resection, 123 patients (34 %) had an R1 ≤ 1 mm resection, and 60 patients (16.6 %) had an R1 direct resection. The independent predictors of DFS were R1 direct resection (hazard ratio [HR], 1.49), R1 ≤ 1 mm resection (HR, 1.38), involvement of one margin (HR, 1.36), and involvement of two margins or more (HR, 1.55). When surgical margins were analyzed separately, only R1 ≤ 1 mm superior mesenteric vein margin (HR, 1.58) and R1 direct posterior margin (HR, 1.69) were independently associated with DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

Positive R status is an independent predictor of DFS (R1 direct and R1 ≤ 1 mm definitions) and of DSS (R1 direct). The presence of multiple positive margins is a risk factor for cancer recurrence and poor survival. Different surgical margins could have different prognostic roles.

Surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous resection: an international survey among surgeons and pathologists

BACKGROUND

The aim of this survey was to gain insights in the current surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with portal-superior mesenteric vein resection (VR).

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed to identify international expert surgeons (N = 150) and pathologists (N = 40) who published relevant studies between 2009 and 2019. These experts and Dutch surgeons (N = 17) and pathologists (N = 20) were approached to complete an online survey.

RESULTS

Overall, 76 (46%) surgeons and 37 (62%) pathologists completed the survey. Most surgeons (71%) estimated that preoperative imaging corresponded correctly with intraoperative findings of venous involvement in 50-75% of patients. An increased complication risk following VR was expected by 55% of surgeons, mainly after Type 4 (segmental resection-venous conduit anastomosis). Most surgeons (61%) preferred Type 3 (segmental resection-primary anastomosis). Most surgeons (75%) always perform the VR themselves. Standard postoperative imaging for patency control was performed by 54% of surgeons and 39% adjusted thromboprophylaxis following VR. Most pathologists (76%) always assessed tumor infiltration in the resected vein and only 54% of pathologists always assess the resection margins of the vein itself. Variation in assessment of tumor infiltration depth was observed.

CONCLUSION

This international survey showed variation in the surgical management and pathological assessment of pancreatoduodenectomy with venous involvement. This highlights the lack of evidence and emphasizes the need for research on imaging modalities to improve patient selection for VR, surgical techniques, postoperative management and standardization of the pathological assessment.

Impact of intraoperative margin clearance on survival following pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The use of intraoperative margin revision to achieve margin clearance in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer is controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to summarize the evidence of intraoperative margin revisions of the pancreatic neck and its impact on overall survival (OS). Nine studies with 4501 patients were included. Patient cohort was stratified in an R0R0-group (negative margin on frozen and permanent section), R1R0-group (revised positive margin on frozen section which turned negative on permanent section), and R1R1-group (positive margin on frozen and permanent section despite margin revision). OS was higher in the R1R0-group (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.72-0.96, P = 0.01) compared to the R1R1-group but lower compared to the R0R0-group (HR 1.20; 95% CI 1.05-1.37, P = 0.008), respectively. Subgroup analyses on the use of different margin clearance definitions confirmed an OS benefit in the R1R0-group compared to the R1R1-group (HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.65-0.99, P = 0.04). In conclusion, intraoperative margin clearance of the pancreatic neck margin is associated with improved OS while residual tumor indicates aggressive tumor biology. Consensus definitions on margin terminologies, clearance, and surgical techniques are required.

Microscopic resection margin status in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A nationwide analysis

INTRODUCTION

First, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of different definitions for resection margin status on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Second, preoperative predictors of direct margin involvement were identified.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This nationwide observational cohort study included all patients who underwent upfront PDAC resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were subdivided into three groups: R0 (≥1 mm margin clearance), R1 (<1 mm margin clearance) or R1 (direct margin involvement). Survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Logistic regression with baseline variables was performed to identify preoperative predictors of R1 (direct).

RESULTS

595 patients with a median OS of 18 months (IQR 10-32 months) months were analysed. R0 (≥1 mm) was achieved in 277 patients (47%), R1 (<1 mm) in 146 patients (24%) and R1 (direct) in 172 patients (29%). R1 (direct) was associated with a worse OS, as compared with both R0 (≥1 mm) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 [95% and confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.70); P < 0.01) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.29 [95%CI 1.01-1.67]; P < 0.05). No OS difference was found between R0 (≥1 mm) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.82-1.34]; P = 0.71). Preoperative predictors associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) included age, male sex, performance score 2-4, and venous or arterial tumour involvement.

CONCLUSION

Resection margin clearance of <1 mm, but without direct margin involvement, does not affect survival, as compared with a margin clearance of ≥1 mm. Given that any vascular tumour involvement on preoperative imaging was associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) resection with upfront surgery, neoadjuvant therapy might be considered in these patients.