Influence of preoperative anti-cancer therapy on resectability and perioperative outcomes in patients with pancreatic cancer: project study by the Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy but not chemotherapy is associated with reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: a nationwide analysis

BACKGROUND

Postoperative pancreatic fistula remains the leading cause of significant morbidity after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Preoperative chemoradiotherapy has been described to reduce the risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula, but randomized trials on neoadjuvant treatment in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma focus increasingly on preoperative chemotherapy rather than preoperative chemoradiotherapy. This study aimed to investigate the impact of preoperative chemotherapy and preoperative chemoradiotherapy on postoperative pancreatic fistula and other pancreatic-specific surgery related complications on a nationwide level.

METHODS

All patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included in the mandatory nationwide prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit (2014-2020). Baseline and treatment characteristics were compared between immediate surgery, preoperative chemotherapy, and preoperative chemoradiotherapy. The relationship between preoperative chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy, and clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery grade B/C) was investigated using multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

Overall, 2,019 patients after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included, of whom 1,678 underwent immediate surgery (83.1%), 192 (9.5%) received preoperative chemotherapy, and 149 (7.4%) received preoperative chemoradiotherapy. Postoperative pancreatic fistula occurred in 8.3% of patients after immediate surgery, 4.2% after preoperative chemotherapy, and 2.0% after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (P = .004). In multivariable analysis, the use of preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula (odds ratio, 0.21; 95% confidence interval, 0.03-0.69; P = .033) compared with immediate surgery, whereas preoperative chemotherapy was not (odds ratio, 0.59; 95% confidence interval, 0.25-1.25; P = .199). Intraoperatively hard, or fibrotic pancreatic texture was most frequently observed after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (53% immediate surgery, 62% preoperative chemotherapy, 77% preoperative chemoradiotherapy, P < .001).

CONCLUSION

This nationwide analysis demonstrated that in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, only preoperative chemoradiotherapy, but not preoperative chemotherapy, was associated with a reduced risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula.

Comparison of the upfront surgery and neoadjuvant therapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Pancreatic cancer is a malignant disease with a dismal prognosis. While neoadjuvant therapy has shown promise in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, its role remains a subject of controversy among physicians. We aimed to evaluate the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Eligible studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Studies comparing neoadjuvant therapy with upfront surgery (with or without adjuvant therapy) in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were included. The primary endpoint assessed was overall survival. A total of 10,022 studies were identified, and the meta-analysis finally enrolled 50 revealed studies. The meta-analysis suggested that neoadjuvant therapy significantly improved the overall survival (HR 0.74, p < 0.001) and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.75, p = 0.006) compared to the upfront surgery approach. Furthermore, neoadjuvant therapy leads to favorable postoperative outcomes, with an enhanced R0 resection rate (OR 1.90, p < 0.001) and reduced lymph node metastasis (OR 0.36, p < 0.001) and perineural invasion (OR 0.42, p < 0.001), although it is associated with a reduced resection rate (OR 0.42, p < 0.001). In addition, patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy experience superior survival benefits compared to those undergoing adjuvant therapy (HR 0.87, p = 0.019). These results are further corroborated by the subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neoadjuvant therapy has the potential to provide survival benefits and improve postoperative long-term outcomes for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. However, to validate and reinforce these findings, further well-designed and large trials are required.

Randomized phase II trial of chemoradiotherapy with S-1 versus combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 as neoadjuvant treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer (JASPAC 04)

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to investigate which treatment, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NAC-RT) with S-1 or combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 (NAC-GS), is more promising as neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for resectable pancreatic cancer in terms of effectiveness and safety.

METHODS

In the NAC-RT with S-1 group, the patients received a total radiation dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with oral S-1. In the NAC-GS group, the patients received intravenous gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m2 with oral S-1 for two cycles. The primary endpoint was the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate. The trial was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry as UMIN000014894.

RESULTS

From April 2014 to April 2017, a total of 103 patients were enrolled. After exclusion of one patient because of ineligibility, 51 patients were included in the NAC-RT with S-1 group, and 51 patients were included in the NAC-GS group in the intention-to-treat analysis. The 2-year PFS rate was 45.0% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 33.3%-56.0%) in the NAC-RT with S-1 group and 54.9% (42.8%-65.5%) in the NAC-GS group (p = .350). The 2-year overall survival rate was 66.7% in the NAC-RT with S-1 group and 72.4% in the NAC-GS group (p = .300). Although leukopenia and neutropenia rates were significantly higher in the NAC-GS group than in the NAC-RT with S-1 group (p = .023 and p < .001), other adverse events of NAT and postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both NAC-RT with S-1 and NAC-GS are considered promising treatments for resectable pancreatic cancer.

The benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) was effective in improving overall survival (OS) of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. However, its application in resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to determine whether NAT has a greater advantage over conventional upfront surgery (US) in terms of resection rate, R0 resection rate, positive lymph node rate, and OS. We identified articles before October 7, 2022, by searching four electronic databases. The studies included in the meta-analysis all met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of the articles. OS, DFS, resection rate, R0 resection rate and positive lymph nodes rate were extracted. Odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, and sensitivity analysis and publication bias were used to assess the sources of heterogeneity. In total, 24 studies, involving 1384 (35.66%) patients assigned to NAT and 2497 (64.43%) patients assigned to US, were included in the analysis. NAT could effectively prolong OS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65-0.82, P < 0.001) and DFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.84, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis results of 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) also showed that RPC patients could benefit from NAT in the long term (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90, P = 0.003). NAT decreased resection rate (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33-0.55, P < 0.001), but was associated with increased R0 resection rate (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.47-2.88, P < 0.001) and decreased positive lymph node rate (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.52, P < 0.001). Although the application of NAT increases the risk of patients not being able to undergo surgical resection, it can prolong the OS and delay tumor progression in RPC. Therefore, we still expect larger and higher-quality RCTs to confirm the effectiveness of NAT.

Neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: A promising curative method to improve prognosis

Currently, 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been designed to investigate whether neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) benefits patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (R-PA) compared to surgery alone. Five of them have acquired results so far; however, corresponding conclusions have not been obtained. We speculated that the reason for this phenomenon could be that some prognostic factors had proven to be adverse through upfront surgery curative patterns, but some of them were not regarded as independent baseline characteristics, which is important to obtaining comparability between the NAT and upfront surgery groups. This fact could cause bias and lead to the difference in the outcomes of RCTs. In this review, we collate data about risk factors (such as tumor size, resection margin, and lymph node status) influencing the prognoses of patients with R-PA from five RCTs and discuss the possible reasons for the varying outcomes.

Neoadjuvant therapy vs. upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer: An update on a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains controversial in the treatment of pancreatic cancer (PC). Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery (US) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC). Eligible studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The endpoints assessed were R0 resection rate, pathological T stage < 2 rate, positive lymph node rate, and overall survival. A total of 4,588 potentially relevant studies were identified, and 13 studies were included in this study. In patients with RPC, this meta-analysis showed that NAT presented an increased R0 resection rate, pathological T stage < 2 rate, and a remarkably reduced positive lymph node rate compared to US. However, patients receiving NAT did not result in a significantly increased overall survival. These findings supported the application of NAT, especially as a patient selection strategy, in the management of RPC. Additional large clinical studies are needed to determine whether NAT is superior to US.

Covered self-expandable metal stents versus plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in patient receiving neo-adjuvant chemotherapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: Prospective randomized study

OBJECTIVES

This single-center comparative randomized superiority study compared biliary stenting using fully covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) and biliary stenting using plastic stents (PS) in preoperative biliary drainage of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) who are planned to undergo a single regimen of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NAC).

METHODS

Twenty-two patients with BRPC who required preoperative biliary drainage before NAC (Gemcitabine plus Nab-paclitaxel) were randomly assigned 1:1 to the FCSEMS or PS group. The primary endpoint was the rate of stent dysfunction until surgery or tumor progression. Secondary endpoints were stent patency, number of re-interventions, adverse events of endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (EBD), operation time, volume of intraoperative bleeding, postoperative hospitalization, postoperative adverse events and medical costs.

RESULTS

Eleven patients in each of the groups reached the primary endpoint. The FCSEMS group showed a significantly lower rate of stent dysfunction (18.2% vs. 72.8%, P = 0.015), longer stent patency (P = 0.02), and lower number of re-interventions for stent dysfunction (0.27 ± 0.65 vs. 1.27 ± 1.1, P = 0.001) than the PS group. The adverse events of EBD, operation time, volume of intraoperative bleeding, postoperative hospitalization, postoperative adverse events and medical costs did not significantly differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with BRPC for preoperative biliary drainage, stent dysfunction occurred less frequently with FCSEMSs than with PSs. In addition, FCSEMS and PS provided similar preoperative management of BRPC in terms of the safety of surgery and medical costs. (UMIN ID000030473).

The effect of preoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy on pancreatic fistula and other surgical complications after pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy is recommended for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of preoperative therapy on surgical complications in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included studies reporting on the rate of surgical complications after preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in pancreatic cancer patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of grade B/C POPF. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Forty-one comparative studies including 25,389 patients were included. Vascular resections were more often performed after preoperative therapy (29.4% vs. 15.7%, p < 0.001). Preoperative therapy was associated with a lower rate of grade B/C POPF as compared to immediate surgery (pooled OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.38-0.58). This reduction was mostly obtained by preoperative chemoradiotherapy (OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.29-0.73), but not by preoperative chemotherapy alone (OR 0.83, 95%CI 0.59-1.16). No difference was demonstrated for major morbidity, mortality, postpancreatectomy haemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying and overall morbidity.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemo- and chemoradiotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer appears to be safe with respect to POPF and other surgical complications as compared to immediate surgery. The reduced rate of POPF appears to be attributable to preoperative chemoradiation.

Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy versus gemcitabine and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel combination therapy as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable/borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC-GS/GA-rP2, CSGO-HBP-015)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal disease, and multimodal strategies, such as surgery plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC)/adjuvant chemotherapy, have been attempted to improve survival in patients with localized PDAC. To date, there is one prospective study providing evidence for the superiority of a neoadjuvant strategy over upfront surgery for localized PDAC. However, which NAC regimen is optimal remains unclear.

METHODS

A randomized, exploratory trial is performed to examine the clinical benefits of two chemotherapy regimens, gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA), as NAC for patients with planned PDAC resection. Patients are enrolled after the diagnosis of resectable or borderline resectable PDAC. They are randomly assigned to either NAC regimen. Adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection is highly recommended for 6 months in both arms. The primary endpoint is tumor progression-free survival time, and secondary endpoints include the rate of curative resection, the completion rate of protocol therapy, the recurrence type, the overall survival time, and safety. The target sample size is set as at least 100.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first randomized phase II study comparing GS combination therapy with GA combination therapy as NAC for localized pancreatic cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000021484 . This trial began in April 2016.

Validation of the triple-checked criteria for drain management after pancreatectomy

BACKGROUND

Drain management is important for the detection and treatment of clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). We previously established the triple-checked criteria for drain removal: drain fluid amylase (DFA) <5000 U/L on postoperative day (POD) 1 and DFA <3000 U/L on POD 3, or C-reactive protein <15 mg/dL on POD 3. This study aimed to validate the efficacy of the triple-checked criteria.

METHODS

In this study, 681 patients who underwent pancreatectomy were included. Drains were removed according to our previous criteria (sequentially checked criteria: DFA <5000 U/L on POD 1 and DFA <3000 U/L on POD 3) from 2012 to 2016 (control group) and the triple-checked criteria from 2017 to 2019 (intervention group).

RESULTS

The control group included 406 patients, and the intervention group included 275 patients. Significantly more patients (n = 237, 86.2%) met the triple-checked criteria in the intervention group, relative to the sequentially checked criteria for early drain removal policy (n = 309, 76.1%; P = .001). Sensitivity, accuracy, and negative predictive value were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (P < .001). The incidence of CR-POPF was not significantly different (11.1% vs 13.8%, P = .285).

CONCLUSIONS

The triple-checked criteria contributed to effective drain removal after pancreatectomy without increasing CR-POPF.

Staging laparoscopy is mandatory for the treatment of pancreatic cancer to avoid missing radiologically negative metastases

PURPOSE

Staging laparoscopy is considered useful for determining treatment plans for advanced pancreatic cancer. However, the indications for staging laparoscopy are not clear. This study aimed to evaluate the safety of staging laparoscopy and its usefulness for detecting distant metastases in patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

A total of 146 patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent staging laparoscopy between 2013 and 2019 were analyzed. Staging laparoscopy was performed in all pancreatic cancer patients in whom surgery was considered possible.

RESULTS

In this cohort, 42 patients (29%) were diagnosed with malignant cells on peritoneal lavage cytology, 9 (6%) had peritoneal dissemination, and 11 (8%) had liver metastases. A total of 48 (33%) had radiologically negative metastases. On a multivariate analysis, body and tail cancer [odds ratio (OR) 5.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.15-11.6, p < 0.001], high CA19-9 level [OR 4.04, 95% CI 1.74-9.38, p = 0.001], and a resectability status of unresectable (OR 2.31, 95% CI 1.03-5.20, p = 0.04) were independent risk factors for radiologically negative metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Staging laparoscopy can be safely performed and is useful for the diagnosis of radiologically negative metastases. Staging laparoscopy should be routinely performed for the accurate diagnosis of pancreatic cancer patients before pancreatectomy and/or local treatment, such as radiotherapy.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemotherapy has shown benefits for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has also been attempted in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC); however, its role remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical difference between NAC and upfront resection (UR) in RPC.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles from inception to February 2019 that addressed the overall survival in patients with RPC treated with or without NAC to identify eligible studies. Eleven studies were included in the final meta-analysis. The quality assessment of the included studies was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa quality scale. Data of the unresectable rate, R0 resection rate, and positive lymph node rate were also extracted in each study for further analysis. Pooled hazard ratio (HR), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the strength of the association.

RESULTS

A total of eleven studies (eight cohort studies and three randomized controlled trials) involving 9773 patients were included. Ten of the eleven studies followed the "intention-to-treat" principle. NAC was found to be significantly associated with a higher R0 resection rate (P < 0.0001; OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.70-4.03) and increased negative lymph node rate (P < 0.00001; OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.31-0.37). However, compared with the UR group, NAC was related to a lower surgical resection rate (P = 0.0004; OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.41-3.37). Overall, the NAC group exhibited no benefits in terms of overall survival compared with that in the UR group (P = 0.10; HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.03). In the subgroup analysis, however, patients who received gemcitabine-based regimen as the NAC strategy had more favorable overall survival than that in the UR group (P = 0.04; HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC may be associated with a lower resection rate; however, it is associated with an increased R0 resection rate and lymph node negative rate. Although overall survival was similar in patients with or without NAC, gemcitabine-based NAC might provide longer overall survival. Further large-volume, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the improved prognosis of patients undergoing NAC.

Moving the Target on the Optimal Adjuvant Strategy for Resected Pancreatic Cancers: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

Combination regimens have shown superiority over single agents in the adjuvant treatment of resected pancreatic cancer (PC), but there are no data supporting definition of the best regimen. This work aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine+capecitabine, and gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel in PC patients. A meta-analysis was performed for direct comparison between trials comparing combination regimens and gemcitabine monotherapy. Subsequently, an indirect comparison was made between trials investigating the efficacy and safety of mFOLFIRINOX, gemcitabine+capecitabine, and gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel because of the same control arm (gemcitabine). A total of three studies met the selection criteria and were included in our indirect comparison. Indirect comparisons for efficacy outcomes showed a benefit in terms of DFS (disease-free survival)/EFS (event-free survival)/RFS (relapse-free survival) for both mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine+capecitabine (HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.52–0.91) and versus gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel (HR 0.67, 95% CI 0.50–0.90). No significant advantage was registered for OS (overall survival). Indirect comparisons for safety showed an increase in terms of G3-5 AEs (with the exception of neutropenia) for mFOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine+capecitabine (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03–1.50), while no significant differences were observed versus gemcitabine+nab/paclitaxel. According to our results, mFOLFIRINOX is feasible and manageable and could represent a first option for fit PC resected patients.

Risk model for severe postoperative complications after total pancreatectomy based on a nationwide clinical database

BACKGROUND

Total pancreatectomy is required to completely clear tumours that are locally advanced or located in the centre of the pancreas. However, reports describing clinical outcomes after total pancreatectomy are rare. The aim of this retrospective observational study was to assess clinical outcomes following total pancreatectomy using a nationwide registry and to create a risk model for severe postoperative complications.

METHODS

Patients who underwent total pancreatectomy from 2013 to 2017, and who were recorded in the Japan Society of Gastroenterological Surgery and Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery database, were included. Severe complications at 30 days were defined as those with a Clavien-Dindo grade III needing reoperation, or grade IV-V. Occurrence of severe complications was modelled using data from patients treated from 2013 to 2016, and the accuracy of the model tested among patients from 2017 using c-statistics and a calibration plot.

RESULTS

A total of 2167 patients undergoing total pancreatectomy were included. Postoperative 30-day and in-hospital mortality rates were 1·0 per cent (22 of 2167 patients) and 2·7 per cent (58 of 167) respectively, and severe complications developed in 6·0 per cent (131 of 2167). Factors showing a strong positive association with outcome in this risk model were the ASA performance status grade and combined arterial resection. In the test cohort, the c-statistic of the model was 0·70 (95 per cent c.i. 0·59 to 0·81).

CONCLUSION

The risk model may be used to predict severe complications after total pancreatectomy.

Fully covered self-expandable metal stent with an anti-migration system vs plastic stent for distal biliary obstruction caused by borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A protocol for systematic review

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Biliary obstruction can impair the effectiveness of neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. This study was designed to compare biliary stenting with covered self-expandable metal stents (FCSEMS) and plastic stents (PS) in patients with biliary obstruction caused by borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) who were undergoing neo-adjuvant chemotherapy during preoperative biliary drainage.

METHODS

This single-center, comparative, randomized, superiority study was designed to compare FCSEMS with PS for drainage of biliary obstruction of BRPC. Twenty two eligible patients providing informed consent will be randomized 1:1 by computer to either FCSEMS or PS for endoscopic retrograde biliary drainage (ERBD). All subsequent clinical interventions, including crossover to alternative procedures, will be at the discretion of the treating physician based on standard clinical care. The primary outcomes will be the rates and causes of stent dysfunction during preoperative biliary drainage. Other outcomes include time required for ERBD, adverse events related to ERBD, period from ERBD to surgery, percentage of patients able to undergo surgery, operation time, intraoperative bleeding volume, postoperative adverse events, and postoperative hospitalization. Subjects, treating clinicians, and outcome assessors will not be blinded to assignment.

DISCUSSION

This study is intended to determine whether FCSEMS or PS is the better biliary stent for ERBD for management of patients with biliary obstruction of BRPC, a common clinical dilemma that has not yet been investigated in randomized trials.

TRIALS REGISTRATION

UMIN-CTR, Identifier: UMIN000030473. Registered July 10, 2017, Wakayama Medical University Hospital.

Clinical Significance of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy With Gemcitabine Plus S-1 for Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND/AIM

Little is known about the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) for patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (R-PDAC). The aim of this study was to investigate differences in the long-term outcome of patients with R-PDAC undergoing pancreatectomy with and without NAC-GS to clarify the clinical significance of NAC-GS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 77 patients with R-PDAC who were scheduled for pancreatectomy between January 2012 and December 2017 were enrolled. Of these patients, 39 received NAC-GS (GS group) and 38 had upfront surgery (UFS group).

RESULTS

Among the 77 patients, one patient in each group did not undergo pancreatectomy due to intraoperative non-curative factors. Median tumor size and the number of lymph nodes with metastasis were significantly lower in the GS group than in the UFS group (p=0.002 and p=0.017). However, the 5-year overall survival rate was similar in the two groups (26.1% versus 21.5%, p=0.930).

CONCLUSION

NAC-GS may not be recommended for patients with R-PDAC since it does not seem to offer any survival benefits.

Modified FOLFIRINOX for resected pancreatic cancer: Opportunities and challenges

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Adjuvant chemotherapy has been developed based on the experiences made with palliative chemotherapy, and advocated to improve long-term survival of patients with this disease. However, the optimal chemotherapeutic regimen remains controversial. Recently, Conroy et al demonstrated the impressive benefits of modified FOLFIRINOX over gemcitabine alone in the multicenter Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive 24 (PRODIGE-24) trial. The remarkable results mark a new milestone in treating resectable pancreatic cancer and have now changed the standard of care for this patient population. In this commentary, we discuss an issue of difference of tumor grade between the PRODIGE-24 trial and previous phase III trials. We also discuss potential biomarkers predicting therapeutic response to modified FOLFIRINOX. Finally, we summarize several ongoing clinical trials of replacing part of the FOLFIRINOX regimen with Xeloda/S-1/nanoliposomal irinotecan for pancreatic cancer.

Decreased serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels after neoadjuvant therapy predict a better prognosis for patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a multicenter case-control study of 240 patients

Background

Carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19–9 levels after resection are considered to predict prognosis; however, the significance of decreased CA19–9 levels after neoadjuvant therapy has not been clarified. This study aimed to define the prognostic significance of decreased CA19–9 levels after neoadjuvant therapy in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Methods

Between 2001 and 2012, 240 consecutive patients received neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent resection at seven high-volume institutions in Japan. These patients were divided into three groups: Normal group (no elevation [≤37 U/ml] before and after neoadjuvant therapy), Responder group (elevated levels [> 37 U/ml] before neoadjuvant therapy but decreased levels [≤37 U/ml] afterwards), and Non-responder group (elevated levels [> 37 U/ml] after neoadjuvant therapy). Analyses of overall survival and recurrence patterns were performed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed to clarify the clinicopathological factors influencing overall survival. The initial metastasis sites were also evaluated in these groups.

Results

The Responder group received a better prognosis than the Non-responder group (3-year overall survival: 50.6 and 41.6%, respectively, P = 0.026), but the prognosis was comparable to the Normal group (3-year overall survival: 54.2%, P = 0.934). According to the analysis of the receiver operating characteristic curve, the CA19–9 cut-off level defined as no elevation after neoadjuvant therapy was ≤103 U/ml. The multivariate analysis revealed that a CA19–9 level ≤ 103 U/ml, (P = 0.010, hazard ratio: 1.711; 95% confidence interval: 1.133–2.639), tumor size ≤27 mm (P = 0.040, 1.517; (1.018–2.278)), a lack of lymph node metastasis (P = 0.002, 1.905; (1.276–2.875)), and R0 status (P = 0.045, 1.659; 1.012–2.627) were significant predictors of overall survival. Moreover, the Responder group showed a lower risk of hepatic recurrence (18%) compared to the Non-responder group (31%), though no significant difference in loco-regional, peritoneal or other distant recurrence were observed between groups (P = 0.058, P = 0.700 and P = 0.350, respectively).

Conclusions

Decreased CA19–9 levels after neoadjuvant therapy predicts a better prognosis, with low incidence of hepatic recurrence after surgery.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5460-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A single-arm, phase II trial of neoadjuvant gemcitabine and S1 in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: PREP-01 study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) represents a promising alternative to pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) planned resection, but the survival impact remains undefined. To assess the feasibility and survival outcomes of NAC with gemcitabine and S1 (GS) for PDAC planned resection by prospective study.

METHODS

Patients with resectable or borderline resectable PDAC received 2 cycles of NAC-GS and were offered curative resection followed by gemcitabine adjuvant. The primary endpoint was 2-year overall survival (OS). Adverse events during NAC, radiological and tumor marker responses, resection rate, and surgical safety were evaluated as secondary endpoints (UMIN000004148).

RESULTS

We enrolled 104 patients between 2010 and 2012, with 101 patients treated using NAC-GS as the full analysis set (FAS). Of the 101 patients, 88% received the planned 2 cycles of NAC. Grade 3 neutropenia was common (35%). Radiological partial response and decreased carbohydrate antigen 19-9 concentration (> 50% decrease) were noted in 13% and 41%, respectively. R0/1 resections with M0 were performed in 65 patients without surgical mortality. Of the 65 patients, 44 received planned gemcitabine adjuvant for 6 months as the on-protocol cohort. The primary endpoint for the 2-year OS rate was 55.9% in the FAS (n = 101) and 74.6% in the on-protocol cohort (n = 44).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC-GS was feasible and actively prolonged survival following PDAC planned resection. Randomized control trials are needed to further clarify the survival benefit of NAC-GS in addition to surgery followed by adjuvant therapy.

Randomized phase II/III trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer (Prep-02/JSAP05)

A randomized, controlled trial has begun to compare neoadjuvant chemotherapy using gemcitabine and S-1 with upfront surgery for patients planned resection of pancreatic cancer. Patients were enrolled after the diagnosis of resectable or borderline resectable by portal vein involvement pancreatic cancer with histological confirmation. They were randomly assigned to either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or upfront surgery. Adjuvant chemotherapy using S-1 was administered for 6 months to patients with curative resection who fully recovered within 10 weeks after surgery in both arms. The primary endpoint is overall survival; secondary endpoints include adverse events, resection rate, recurrence-free survival, residual tumor status, nodal metastases and tumor marker kinetics. The target sample size was required to be at least 163 (alpha-error 0.05; power 0.8) in both arms. A total of 360 patients were required after considering ineligible cases. This trial began in January 2013 and was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000009634).

Comparison of neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective

The role of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) remains controversial. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery in RPC.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only patients with RPC who underwent tumor resection and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment were enrolled. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated employing fixed-effects or random-effects models. The HR and its 95% CI were extracted from each article that provided survival curve. Publication bias was estimated using funnel plots and Egger’s regression test.

Results

In total, eleven studies were included with 9,386 patients. Of these patients, 2,508 (26.7%) received NAT. For patients with RPC, NAT resulted in an increased R0 resection rate (OR=1.89; 95% CI=1.26–2.83) and a reduced positive lymph node rate (OR=0.34; 95% CI=0.31–0.37) compared with upfront surgery. Nevertheless, patients receiving NAT did not exhibit a significantly increased overall survival (OS) time (HR=0.91; 95% CI=0.79–1.05).

Conclusion

In patients with RPC, R0 resection rate and positive lymph node rate after NAT were superior to those of patients with upfront surgery. The NAT group exhibited no significant effect on OS time when compared with the upfront surgery group. However, this conclusion requires more clinical evidence to improve its credibility.

Prognostic Impact of Portal System Invasion in Pancreatic Cancer Based on Image Classification

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to clarify the correlation between image classification and the pathological degree of portal system invasion (PSI) and to evaluate the prognostic impact of PSI in pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

Pancreatic cancer patients with surgical resections (head, n = 244; body and tail, n = 80) were enrolled in this study.

RESULTS

Based on imaging findings, portal vein (PV) invasion was classified as type A (absent), B (unilateral narrowing), C (bilateral narrowing), or D (stenosis or obstruction with collaterals). Splenic vein (SPV) invasion was classified as type α (absent), β (stenosis), or γ (obstruction). The pathological grade of venous invasion was classified as grade 0 (no invasion), 1 (tunica adventitia), 2 (tunica media), or 3 (tunica intima). In PV and SPV invasions, image classification and pathological grade showed significant correlation (PV: ρ = 0.696; SPV: ρ = 0.681). Patients with PV invasion deeper than type B exhibited significantly poorer survival than type A (P < 0.0001). In contrast, there was no difference in survival among types α, β, and γ.

CONCLUSIONS

Image classification was correlated with the pathological grade of PSI in PC. Although not applicable for SPV invasion, image classification of PV invasion is a robust indicator for PC prognosis.

Pancreatic Cancer CT: Prediction of Resectability according to NCCN Criteria

Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic performance of CT in the determination of pancreatic cancer resectability according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria to predict R0 resection. Materials and Methods Structured reports of pancreatic CT clinically prepared by board-certified abdominal radiologists from January 2014 to March 2017 were retrospectively reviewed to assess resectability (resectable, borderline resectable, or unresectable) according to NCCN criteria (version 1.2017) in 616 patients (369 men, 247 women; mean age, 63 years ± 10 [standard deviation]) with pancreatic cancer. Negative resection margin (R0) rates were assessed based on CT resectability status in patients who underwent upfront surgery. R0 resection-associated factors were identified by using logistic regression analysis. Results In 371 patients who underwent surgery, R0 resection rates were 73% (171 of 235), 55% (57 of 104), and 16% (five of 32) for resectable, borderline resectable, and unresectable disease, respectively (P < .001). At multivariable analysis, tumor diameter larger than 4 cm (P < .001) and abutment to the portomesenteric vein (P < .001) were significantly associated with margin-positive resection in patients with resectable disease at CT. R0 resection rates were 80% (123 of 154) for resectable disease without portomesenteric vein abutment, 59% (48 of 81) for resectable disease with portomesenteric vein abutment, 83% (57 of 69) for resectable disease 2 cm or smaller, and 29% (five of 17) for tumors larger than 4 cm. Conclusion CT resectability is used to stratify patients with pancreatic cancer according to the possibility of R0 resection. Larger tumor size and tumor abutment to the portomesenteric vein are associated with margin-positive resection in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. © RSNA, 2018 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Fowler in this issue.

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: conceptual evolution and current approach to image-based classification

Background

Diagnostic imaging plays a critical role in the initial diagnosis and therapeutic monitoring of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Over the past decade, the concept of 'borderline resectable' pancreatic cancer has emerged to describe a distinct subset of patients existing along the spectrum from resectable to locally advanced disease for whom a microscopically margin-positive (R1) resection is considered relatively more likely, primarily due to the relationship of the primary tumor with surrounding vasculature.

Materials and methods

This review traces the conceptual evolution of borderline resectability from a radiological perspective, including the debates over the key imaging criteria that define the thresholds between resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced or metastatic disease. This review also addresses the data supporting neoadjuvant therapy in this population and discusses current imaging practices before and during treatment.

Results

A growing body of evidence suggests that the borderline resectable group of patients may particularly benefit from neoadjuvant therapy to increase the likelihood of an ultimately margin-negative (R0) resection. Unfortunately, anatomic and imaging criteria to define borderline resectability are not yet universally agreed upon, with several classification systems proposed in the literature and considerable variance in institution-by-institution practice. As a result of this lack of consensus, as well as overall small patient numbers and lack of established clinical trials dedicated to borderline resectable patients, accurate evidence-based diagnostic categorization and treatment selection for this subset of patients remains a significant challenge.

Conclusions

Clinicians and radiologists alike should be cognizant of evolving imaging criteria for borderline resectability given their profound implications for treatment strategy, follow-up recommendations, and prognosis.

Neoadjuvant radiation followed by resection versus upfront resection for locally advanced pancreatic cancer patients: a propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To compare cancer-specific survival (CSS) between patients who received neoadjuvant radiation followed by resection (NRR) and those who received upfront resection (UR) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

METHODS

A total of 772 LAPC patients who underwent curative-intent surgical resection with or without neoadjuvant radiation from 2004 to 2013 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was conducted to eliminate possible bias. Kaplan-Meier method was used to analyze long-term outcome. Independent risk factors of CSS were predicted by Cox proportional hazards model. Subgroup analyses were done according to 5 variables.

RESULTS

The propensity score model matched 196 patients from the whole cohort. Neoadjuvant radiation was an independent predictor of CSS no matter before or after PSM. After PSM, the 1-, 3-, 5-year CSS rates of NRR group were 82.7%, 39.2% and 17.1%, while 64.3%, 19.9% and 12.4% for UR group. The median CSS for NRR group was 25 months, while 17 months for UR group. In subgroup analyses, CSS rates or median CSS of NRR group were still superior to those of UR group in married, unmarried, pancreatic adenocarcinoma, G1+G2, G3+G4, N0 stage, N1 stage and M0 stage subgroups, but no differences were found in other histological types and M1 stage subgroups. Other predictors of CSS included histological type, tumor grade and marital status.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant radiation followed by resection has a significant survival benefit compared with upfront resection in LAPC patients. Therapeutic strategy for LAPC patients should be further explored.

Meta-analysis of the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on patterns of recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy may increase the rate of radical tumour resection in patients with pancreatic cancer. Its impact on tumour recurrence has not been investigated fully. This study aimed to assess the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on patterns of recurrence.

Methods

A systematic review was performed of articles identified through the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Ovid and Google Scholar databases that analysed the relationship between neoadjuvant therapy and recurrence published to January 2016. The main endpoint was overall tumour recurrence. Other endpoints included local recurrence, any kind of distant, hepatic, pulmonary or peritoneal metastasis.

Results

A total of 4257 citations were reviewed. Twelve observational studies comprising 1365 patients were analysed. Neoadjuvant therapy significantly reduced the risk of overall (risk ratio (RR) 0·82, 95 per cent c.i. 0·74 to 0·90; P < 0·001) and local (RR 0·42, 0·32 to 0·55; P < 0·001) recurrence. Neoadjuvant therapy did not reduce the risk of any kind of distant (RR 1·02, 0·91 to 1·14; P = 0·78), hepatic (RR 0·86, 0·68 to 1·10; P = 0·23), pulmonary (RR 0·99, 0·37 to 2·66; P = 0·98) or peritoneal (RR 0·88, 0·57 to 1·38; P = 0·58) metastasis.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant therapy reduced the risk of local recurrence but not that of distant metastasis.

Neoadjuvant treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 5520 patients

BACKGROUND

Recent years have seen standardization of the anatomic definitions of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and increasing utilization of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). The aim of the current review was to summarize the evidence for NAT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma since 2009, when consensus criteria for resectable (R), borderline resectable (BR), and locally advanced (LA) disease were endorsed.

METHODS

PubMed search was undertaken along with extensive backward search of the references of published articles to identify studies utilizing NAT for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Abstracts from ASCO-GI 2014 and 2015 were also searched.

RESULTS

A total of 96 studies including 5520 patients were included in the final quantitative synthesis. Pooled estimates revealed 36% grade ≥ 3 toxicities, 5% biliary complications, 21% hospitalization rate and low mortality (0%, range 0-16%) during NAT. The majority of patients (59%) had stable disease. On an intention-to-treat basis, R0-resection rates varied from 63% among R patients to 23% among LA patients. R0 rates were > 80% among all patients who were resected after NAT. Among R and BR patients who underwent resection after NAT, median OS was 30 and 27.4 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study summarizes the recent literature for NAT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma and demonstrates improving outcomes after NAT compared to those historically associated with a surgery-first approach for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Current and Evolving Therapies

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), which constitutes 90% of pancreatic cancers, is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the world. Due to the broad heterogeneity of genetic mutations and dense stromal environment, PDAC belongs to one of the most chemoresistant cancers. Most of the available treatments are palliative, with the objective of relieving disease-related symptoms and prolonging survival. Currently, available therapeutic options are surgery, radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and use of targeted drugs. However, thus far, therapies targeting cancer-associated molecular pathways have not given satisfactory results; this is due in part to the rapid upregulation of compensatory alternative pathways as well as dense desmoplastic reaction. In this review, we summarize currently available therapies and clinical trials, directed towards a plethora of pathways and components dysregulated during PDAC carcinogenesis. Emerging trends towards targeted therapies as the most promising approach will also be discussed.

The impact of neoadjuvant therapy on the histopathological features of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to increased rates of curative tumor resections exceeding 60% after FOLFIRINOX-treatment, neoadjuvant therapy/NTx is increasingly recognized as an effective therapy option for downstaging borderline or locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/PDAC. Yet, the effects of NTx on the common histopathological features of PDAC have not been systematically analysed. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to assess the impact of NTx on relevant histopathological features of PDAC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Biomedical databases were systematically screened for predefined searching terms related to NTx and PDAC. The Preferred-Reporting-Items-for-Systematic-review-and-Meta-Analysis/PRISMA-guidelines were used to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles meeting the predefined criteria were analysed on relevance, and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 9031 studies could be identified that analysed the effect of NTx on PDAC. Only 35 studies presented comparative data on the histological features of neoadjuvantly treated vs. upfront resected PDAC patients. In meta-analyses, the beneficial effect of NTx was reflected by reduced tumor size (T1/2: RR 2.87, 95%-CI: 1.52-5.42, P=0.001, T3/4: RR 0.78, 95%-CI: 0.69-0.89, P=0.0002), lower N-Stage (N0: RR 2.14, 95%-CI: 1.85-2.46, P<0.00001, N1: RR 0.59, 95%-CI: 0.53-0.65, P<0.00001), higher R0-rates (R0: RR 1.13, 95%-CI: 1.08-1.18, P<0.00001, R1: RR 0.66, 95%-CI: 0.58-0.76, P<0.00001), less perineural invasion (Pn1: RR 0.78, 95%-CI: 0.73-0.83, P<0.00001), less lymphatic vessel invasion (RR: 0.50, 95%-CI: 0.36-0.70, P<0.0001) and fewer G3-tumors (RR 0.82, 95%-CI: 0.71-0.94, P=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

NTx in PDAC seems to exert its beneficial effect in borderline or locally advanced PDAC over genuine tumor downstaging. Thus, although at least 40% of all NTx treated patients remain unresectable even with modern NTx regimes, neoadjuvantly treated PDAC showed not only increasing resectability rates especially after FOLFIRINOX, but even reach a lower tumor stage than primarily resected PDAC.

Prognostic impact of type of preoperative biliary drainage in patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Surgical results of patients with resected distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCC) were evaluated to elucidate prognostic impact of the type of preoperative biliary drainage (PBD).

METHODS

Eighty-eight patients with resected DCC were stratified into two groups according to the type of PBD: the percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) group (n = 25) and the endoscopic biliary drainage (EBD) group (n = 63).

RESULTS

Overall 5-year survival rate of the patients in the PTBD group was poorer than in the EBD group (24% vs. 52%, P = 0.020). On univariate analysis, PTBD, pancreatic invasion, perineural invasion, and lymph node involvement were significant prognostic factors for poor overall survival. On multivariate analysis, PTBD was the only significantly independent prognostic factor for poor overall survival. The incidence of liver metastasis was significantly higher in the PTBD group than in the EBD group (32.0% vs. 13.3%, P = 0.034).

CONCLUSIONS

PTBD should be avoided as much as possible in patients with DCC since the patients who underwent PTBD had poorer overall survival and higher incidence of liver metastasis than those who underwent EBD.

Clinical outcomes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma resection following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy vs. chemotherapy

PURPOSE

We compared the clinical outcomes of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resection after neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) vs. chemotherapy (NAC).

METHODS

The study population comprised 81 patients with UICC stage T3/4 PDAC, treated initially by NACRT with S-1 in 40 and by NAC with gemcitabine + S-1 in 41. This was followed by pancreatectomy with routine nerve plexus resection in 35 of the patients who had received NACRT and 32 of those who had received NAC. We compared the survival curves and clinical outcomes of these two groups.

RESULTS

The rates of clinical response, surgical resectability, and margin-negative resection were similar. The NACRT group patients had significantly higher rates of Evans stage ≥IIB tumors (29 vs. 0 %, respectively, p = 0.010) and negative lymph nodes (49 vs. 16 %, respectively, p = 0.021) than the NAC group patients. There was no difference in disease-free survival between the groups, but the disease-specific survival of the NAC group patients was better than that of the NACRT group patients (p = 0.034). Patients undergoing pancreatectomy with nerve plexus resection following NACRT had significantly higher rates of intractable diarrhea and ascites but consequently received significantly less adjuvant chemotherapy and therapeutic chemotherapy for relapse.

CONCLUSION

NACRT followed by pancreatectomy with nerve plexus resection is superior for achieving local control, but postoperative diarrhea and ascites may prohibit continuation of adjuvant chemotherapy or chemotherapy for relapse (UMIN4148).

The role of neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a review

Controversy remains regarding neoadjuvant approaches in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over adjuvant therapy including earlier delivery of systemic treatment, in vivo assessment of response, increased resectability rate in borderline resectable patients and increased margin-negative resection rate. At present, there are no randomized data favoring neoadjuvant over adjuvant therapy and multiple neoadjuvant approaches are under investigation. Combination chemotherapy regimens including 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan and oxaliplatin, gemcitabine with or without abraxane, or docetaxel and capecitabine have been used in the neoadjuvant setting. Radiation and chemoradiation have also been incorporated into neoadjuvant strategies, and delivery of alternative fractionation regimens is being explored. This review provides an overview of neoadjuvant therapies for pancreatic cancer.

Pre-treatment neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as a predictive marker for pathological response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in pancreatic cancer

An elevated neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) has been reported to be associated with the pathological response to neoadjuvant therapies in numerous types of cancer. The aim of the current study was to clarify the association between pre-treatment NLR and the pathological response to preoperative chemoradiotherapy in pancreatic cancer patients. This retrospective analysis included data from 56 consecutive patients whose tumors were completely surgically resected. All patients received preoperative therapy, consisting of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy (alone or in combination with S-1) combined with 40 or 50.4 Gy irradiation, prior to surgery. Predictive factors, including NLR, platelet to lymphocyte ratio (PLR), modified Glasgow prognostic score and prognostic nutrition index, were measured prior to treatment. A comparison was made between those who responded well pathologically (good response group, Evans classification IIb/III) and those with a poor response (Evans I/IIa). NLR was determined to be significantly higher in the poor response group. Multivariate analysis identified an elevated NLR as an independent risk factor for the poor pathological response [odds ratio (OR), 5.35; P=0.0257]. The pre-treatment NLR (≥2.2/<2.2) was found to be a statistically significant predictive indicator of pathological response (P=0.00699). The results demonstrate that pre-treatment NLR may be a useful predictive marker for the pathological response to preoperative therapy in pancreatic cancer patients.

Neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of response and resection percentages

BACKGROUND

We systematically reviewed and performed a meta-analysis of the available data regarding neoadjuvant chemo- and/or radiotherapy with special emphasis on tumor response/progression rates, toxicities, and clinical benefit, i.e. resection probabilities and survival estimates.

METHODS AND FINDINGS

Trials were identified by searching PUBMED, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from 1966 to Feb 2015. A total of 18 studies (n = 959) were analyzed. the estimated fraction of patients with complete response was 2.8% (CI 0.8-4.7%) and with partial response 28.7% (CI 18.9%-38.5%). Stable disease was averaged to 45.9% (CI 32.9%-58.9%) in all patients and tumor progression under therapy occurred by estimation in 16.9% (CI 10.2%-23.6%) of the patients. The weighted frequency of those who underwent resection was 65.3% (CI 54.2%-76.5%), and the proportion of R0 resection amounted to 57.4% (CI 48.2%-66.5%). The weighted mean of median survival amounted to 17.9 months (range: 14.7-21.2 months) for the overall cohort of patients, 25.9 months (range: 21.1-30.7 months) for those who were resected, and 11.9 months (range: 10.4-13.5 months) for unresected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The resection and R0 resection rates in the group of borderline resectable tumor patients after neoadjuvant therapy are similar to the resectable tumor patients, much higher than those in unresectable tumor patients. The survival estimates of borderline resectable tumor patients after neoadjuvant therapy were similar to resectable tumor patients. Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer should be included in neoadjuvant protocols and subsequently be reevaluated for resection. How to find chemo-responsiveness before neoadjuvant chemotherapy so as to give individualized treatment is still an important issue.

Neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based accelerated hyperfractionation chemoradiotherapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

We report the response to pre-operative gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Thirty-five consecutive patients with borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma of UICC Stage II or III with portal vein invasion or tumor abutment of artery received radiotherapy (twice daily fractions of 1.5 Gy, 5 days/week, total dose: 36 Gy; 30 Gy for Phase I Level 1) with weekly intravenous infusions of gemcitabine (400, 600 and 800 mg/m(2)) at Days 1 and 8 for Phase I and 800 mg/m(2) for Phase II. Restaging was repeated after completion of chemoradiotherapy.

RESULTS

Twenty-six of the 35 (74.3%) patients underwent resection. The dose-limiting toxicities were Grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. The recommended regimen was total radiation dose of 36 Gy with gemcitabine 800 mg/m(2). Surgical resection was conducted in 11 of the 15 (73.3%) patients in Phase I study and 15 of the 20 (75.0%) in Phase II. After recommended dose chemoradiotherapy and surgical resection, the median disease-free survival was 17.4 months (5-year survival rate = 14.3%). The median overall survival time and 5-year survival rate were 41.2 months and 28.6%, respectively, for the 21 patients who underwent resection and 10.0 months and 0%, respectively, for those 5 who did not (P = 0.004).

CONCLUSION

Our pre-operative gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy was well tolerated and safe.