Defining and Treating Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

The involvement of the hepatic artery is a risk factor for unresectability after neoadjuvant treatment in borderline pancreatic adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) benefits from neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) with the intent of surgical salvage in the absence of disease progression during chemotherapy (CT) or chemoradiotherapy (CRT). Scarce literature exists about prognostic factors of resectability at the time of diagnosis or during neoadjuvant treatment, especially regarding vascular relationships.

MATERIALS

We reviewed our prospective BR-PDAC cohort to determine resectability predictors. We collected data about clinical baseline characteristics, vessels' involvement, type of NAT, CA19-9 evolution, and radiological outcome. We performed a descriptive analysis and a logistic regression model to define resectability predictors; we finally compared overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) for those predictors.

RESULTS

One hundred patients started NAT, with a resection rate of 44 % (40 pancreaticoduodenectomies, 4 distal pancreatectomies). The most frequent vessel relationship was the abutment of the superior mesenteric artery (44 %), and 26 patients had ≥2 vessels involved. Prognostic factors of resectability were CA19-9 response >10 % (OR 3.07, p = 0.016) and Hepatic Artery involvement (OR 0.21, p = 0.026). Median overall survival was better for CA19-9 responders than for non-responders (20.9 months and 11.8 months respectively, p < 0.001), and similar to normalized CA19-9 (25.0 months, p = 0.48). There were no differences in terms of OS or PFS with the involvement of the HA (17.7 vs 17.1 months, p = 0.367; and 8.7 vs 12.0 months, p = 0.267).

CONCLUSION

The involvement of the Hepatic Artery seems to confer a worse prognosis regarding resectability. A decrease of only >10 % of CA19-9 is a predictive factor for resectability and better overall and progression-free survival.

Surgical Considerations for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a challenging disease process with a 5-year survival rate of only 11%. Neoadjuvant therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer has multiple theoretical benefits, including improved patient selection for surgery, early delivery of systemic therapy, and assessment of response to therapy. Herein, we review key surgical considerations when selecting patients for neoadjuvant therapy and curative-intent resection. Accurate determination of resectability at diagnosis is critical and should be based on not only anatomic criteria but also biologic and clinical criteria to determine optimal treatment sequencing. Borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer is best treated with neoadjuvant therapy and resection, including vascular resection and reconstruction when appropriate. Lastly, providing nutritional, prehabilitation, and supportive care interventions to improve patient fitness prior to surgical intervention and adequately address the adverse effects of therapy is critical.

Predictive factors for resection and survival in type A borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients after neoadjuvant therapy: A retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is the seventh leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide, and surgical resection with radical intent remains the only potentially curative treatment option today. However, borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (BR-PDAC) stand in the gray area between the resectable and unresectable disease since they are technically resectable but have a high probability of incomplete exeresis. Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) plays an important role in ensuring resection success.Different survival prognostic factors for BR-PDAC have been well described, but evidence on the predictive factors associated with resection after NAT is scarce. This study aims to study if CA 19-9 plasmatic levels and the tumor anatomical relationship with neighboring vascular structures are prognostic factors for resection and survival (both Overall Survival and Progression-Free Survival) in patients with type A BR-PDAC.

METHODS

This will be a retrospective cohort study using data from type A BR-PDAC patients who received NAT in the Bellvitge University Hospital. The observation period is from January 2010 until December 2019; patients must have a minimum 12-month follow-up. Patients will be classified according to the MD Anderson Cancer Center criteria for BR-PDAC.

DISCUSSION

Patients with BR-PDAC have a high risk for a margin-positive resection. Serum Carbohydrate Antigen 19-9 plasmatic levels and vascular involvement stand out as disease-related prognostic factors.This study will provide valuable information on the prognostic factors associated with resection. We will exclude locally advanced tumors and expect this approach to provide more realistic resection rates without selecting those patients that undergo surgical exploration. However, focusing on an anatomical definition may limit the results' generalizability.

Adjusting CA19-9 values with clinical stage and bilirubin to better predict survival of resectable pancreatic cancer patients: 5-year-follow-up of a single center

Background

Pancreatic cancer mortality is growing every year, and radical resection is the most essential therapy strategy. It is critical to evaluate the long-term prognosis of individuals receiving radical surgery. CA19-9 is a biomarker for patient recurrence and survival, however obstructive jaundice has a significant impact on this index. Researchers have attempted to modify the index using various modification methods, but the results have been unsatisfactory. In this study, we adjusted CA19-9 values based on clinical stage and bilirubin and found that it provided better prediction than CA19-9 alone in assessing patients.

Methods

We analyzed over 5 years follow-up records of patients who underwent radical pancreatic cancer surgery between August 2009 and May 2017 in a single center. We investigated the association of risk factors with overall survival (OS) as well as disease-free survival (DFS) after surgery. Threshold values for high-risk features associated with poor prognosis in resectable pancreatic cancer were determined. The hazard ratios of the indicators were eventually examined under the stratification of patients’ clinical stages.

Results

A total of 202 patients were involved in the study. The optimum cut-off values for CA19-9 and CA19-9/TB for predicting overall survival were 219.4 (p = 0.0075) and 18.8 (p = 0.0353), respectively. CA19-9>219.4 increased the risk of patient mortality by 1.70 times (95% CI 1.217-2.377, p = 0.002), and tumor poor differentiation raised the risk by 1.66 times (95% CI 1.083-2.553, P = 0.02). Based on clinical stage stratification, we found discrepancies in the predictive efficacy of CA19-9 and CA19-9/TB. CA19-9 was a better predictor in clinical stage 1 (HR = 2.056[CI 95%1.169-3.616], P = 0.012), whereas CA19-9/TB indications were better in stages 2 (HR = 1.650[CI 95%1.023-2.662], P = 0.040) and 3 (HR = 3.989[CI95%1.145-13.896], P = 0.030).

Conclusions

CA19-9, CEA, and tumor differentiation are predictors for patients with resectable PDAC. CA19-9 values can be adjusted based on clinical stage and bilirubin levels to better predict overall survival in patients with resectable PDAC. CA19-9>219.4 predicted poor survival in individuals in clinical stage 1, whereas CA19-9/TB>18.8 predicted poor survival for individuals in stages 2 and 3.

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.

The impact of venous resection in pancreatoduodectomy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vein resection pancreatoduodenectomy (VRPD) may be performed in selected pancreatic cancer patients. However, the main risks and benefits related to VRPD remain controversial.

OBJECTIVE

This review aimed to evaluate the risks and survival benefits that the VRPD may add when compared with standard pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing VRPD and PD were performed.

RESULTS

VRPD was associated with a higher risk for postoperative mortality (risk difference: -0.01; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.02 to -0.00) and complications (risk difference: -0.05; 95% CI -0.09 to -0.01) than PD. The length of hospital stay was not different between the groups (mean difference [MD]: -0.65; 95% CI -2.11 to 0.81). In the VRPD, the operating time was 69 minutes higher on average (MD: -69.09; 95% CI -88.4 to -49.78), with a higher blood loss rate (MD: -314.04; 95% CI -423.86 to -195.22). In the overall survival evaluation, the hazard ratio for mortality during follow-up on the group of VRPD was higher compared to the PD group (hazard ratio: 1.13; 95% CI 1.03-1.23).

CONCLUSION

VRPD is associated with a higher risk of short-term complications and mortality and a lower probability of survival than PD. Knowing the risks and potential benefits of surgery can help clinicians to properly manage pancreatic cancer patients with venous invasion. The decision for surgery with major venous resection should be shared with the patients after they are informed of the risks and prognosis.

Expanding the Spectrum of Pancreatic Cancers Responsive to Vesicular Stomatitis Virus-Based Oncolytic Virotherapy: Challenges and Solutions

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a devastating malignancy with poor prognosis and a dismal survival rate, expected to become the second leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the United States. Oncolytic virus (OV) is an anticancer approach that utilizes replication-competent viruses to preferentially infect and kill tumor cells. Vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), one such OV, is already in several phase I clinical trials against different malignancies. VSV-based recombinant viruses are effective OVs against a majority of tested PDAC cell lines. However, some PDAC cell lines are resistant to VSV. Upregulated type I IFN signaling and constitutive expression of a subset of interferon-simulated genes (ISGs) play a major role in such resistance, while other mechanisms, such as inefficient viral attachment and resistance to VSV-mediated apoptosis, also play a role in some PDACs. Several alternative approaches have been shown to break the resistance of PDACs to VSV without compromising VSV oncoselectivity, including (i) combinations of VSV with JAK1/2 inhibitors (such as ruxolitinib); (ii) triple combinations of VSV with ruxolitinib and polycations improving both VSV replication and attachment; (iii) combinations of VSV with chemotherapeutic drugs (such as paclitaxel) arresting cells in the G2/M phase; (iv) arming VSV with p53 transgenes; (v) directed evolution approach producing more effective OVs. The latter study demonstrated impressive long-term genomic stability of complex VSV recombinants encoding large transgenes, supporting further clinical development of VSV as safe therapeutics for PDAC.