Perioperative or only adjuvant gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for resectable pancreatic cancer (NEONAX)-a randomized phase II trial of the AIO pancreatic cancer group

Establishment of a prognostic model for pancreatic cancer based on vesicle-mediated transport protein-related genes

This study attempted to build a prognostic riskscore model for pancreatic cancer (PC) patients based on vesicle-mediated transport protein-related genes (VMTGs). We initially conducted differential expression analysis and Cox regression analysis, followed by the construction of a riskscore model to classify PC patients into high-risk (HR) and low-risk (LR) groups. The GEO GSE62452 dataset further validated the model. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was employed to analyze the survival rate of the HR group and LR group. Cox analysis confirmed the independent prognostic ability of the riskscore model. Additionally, we evaluated immune status in both HR and LR groups, utilizing data from the GDSC database to predict drug response among PC patients. We identified six PC-specific genes from 724 VMTGs. Survival analysis revealed that the survival rate of the HR group was lower than that of the LR group (P<0.05). Cox analysis confirmed that the prognostic riskscore model could independently predict the survival status of PC patients (P<0.001). Immunological analysis revealed that the ESTIMATE score, immune score, and stroma score of the HR group were considerably lower than those of the LR group, and the tumor purity score of the HR group was higher. The IC50 values of Gemcitabine, Irinotecan, Oxaliplatin, and Paclitaxel in the LR group were considerably lower than those in the HR group (P<0.001). In summary, the VMTG-based prognostic riskscore model could stratify PC risk and effectively predict the survival of PC patients.

Results of a Randomized Clinical Study of Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine Plus S-1 as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (RCT, CSGO-HBP-015)

BACKGROUND

The optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimen for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains uncertain. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA) and gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS), in patients with resectable/borderline-resectable (R/BR) PDAC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment-naïve patients with R/BR-PDAC were enrolled and randomly allocated. They received two cycles (2 months) of each standard protocol, followed by radical surgery for those without tumor progression in general hospitals belonging to our intergroup. The primary endpoint was to determine the superior regimen on the basis of achieving a 10% increase in the rate of patients with progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years from allocation.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were enrolled, with 94 patients randomly assigned to the GS arm (N = 46) or GA arm (N = 48). The 2-year PFS rates did not show the stipulated difference [GA, 31% (24-38%)/GS, 26% (18-33%)], but the Kaplan-Myer analysis showed significance (median PFS, GA/GS 14 months/9 months, P = 0.048; HR 0.71). Secondary endpoint comparisons yielded the following results (GA/GS arm, P-value): rates of severe adverse events during NAC, 73%/78%, P = 0.55; completion rates of the stipulated NAC, 92%/83%, P = 0.71; resection rates, 85%/72%, P = 0.10; average tumor marker (CA19-9) reduction rates, -50%/-21%, P = 0.01; average numbers of lymph node metastasis, 1.7/3.2, P = 0.04; and median overall survival times, 42/22 months, P = 0.26.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that GA and GS are viable neoadjuvant treatment regimens in R/BR-PDAC. Although the GA group exhibited a favorable PFS outcome, the primary endpoint was not achieved.

Organ and function preservation in gastrointestinal cancer: Current and future perspectives on endoscopic ablation

The escalating prevalence of gastrointestinal cancers underscores the urgency for transformative approaches. Current treatment costs amount to billions of dollars annually, combined with the risks and comorbidities associated with invasive surgery. This highlights the importance of less invasive alternatives with organ preservation being a central aspect of the treatment paradigm. The current standard of care typically involves neoadjuvant systemic therapy followed by surgical resection. There is a growing interest in organ preservation approaches by way of minimizing extensive surgical resections. Endoscopic ablation has proven to be useful in precursor lesions, as well as in palliative cases of unresectable disease. More recently, there has been an increase in reports on the utility of adjunct endoscopic ablative techniques for downstaging disease as well as contributing to non-surgical complete clinical response. This expansive field within endoscopic oncology holds great potential for advancing patient care. By addressing challenges, fostering collaboration, and embracing technological advancements, the gastrointestinal cancer treatment paradigm can shift towards a more sustainable and patient-centric future emphasizing organ and function preservation. This editorial examines the evolving landscape of endoscopic ablation strategies, emphasizing their potential to improve patient outcomes. We briefly review current applications of endoscopic ablation in the esophagus, stomach, duodenum, pancreas, bile ducts, and colon.

Neoadjuvant therapy for localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly aggressive tumor with poor prognosis and rising incidence globally. Multimodal therapy that includes surgical resection and chemotherapy with or without radiation offers the best chance for optimal outcomes. The development of established criteria for anatomic staging of local primary tumors into potentially resectable (PR), borderline resectable (BR), and locally advanced (LA) has greatly clarified the optimal treatment strategies. While upfront surgical resection was traditionally the recommended approach for localized PDAC, increasingly neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is recommended prior to surgery. Whereas NT can lead to downstaging that facilitates surgical resection for BR/LA cancers, NT also enhances patient selection for surgery, improves margin-negative resection rates, and increases the odds of completing multimodality therapy for all patients with PDAC. Herein, we review the rationale for NT for localized PDAC and summarize existing and ongoing literature.

Neoadjuvant management of locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - Heading towards a promising change in treatment paradigm

Traditional chemotherapy-based adjuvant therapies for locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) have been associated with poor clinical outcomes driven partly by its complex anatomy and molecular heterogeneity. Treatment for PDAC is challenged by presence of a dense tumour microenvironment involving an interplay of multiple tumoural and stromal components which promote metastatic oncogenic behaviour. PDAC also involves aberrations in multiple signalling pathways with paucity of treatment options against the most common mutations including KRAS, TP53, CDKN2A andSMAD4. However, recent discovery of new mechanisms implicated in pancreatic carcinogenesis have led to identification of promising mechanistic therapeutic targets such as NET1 and ULK1. Early evidence also suggests the utility of targeting multiple DNA repair processes, modulators of DNA replication and major DNA damage response regulators. We explore the clinical rationale behind a neoadjuvant therapeutic strategy and emerging predictors of survival benefit associated with this approach. We also discuss challenges and opportunities originating from recent clinical trials evaluating neoadjuvant treatments composed of various combinations of radiotherapy, chemotherapy and immunotherapeutic regimens that have aimed to address some of these biological challenges. Selective treatment of patients harbouring specific genomic aberrations with targeted agents and immunotherapy can translate into optimum survival outcomes in PDAC. We also share perspectives on emerging prospective clinical evidence regarding stromal modifying agents, such as Tumour Growth Factor-Beta and Connective Tissue Growth Factor inhibitors along with novel vaccination-based approaches in improving PDAC outcomes.

Adjuvant Gemcitabine Versus Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: The Randomized Multicenter Phase II NEPAFOX Trial

BACKGROUND

Although addition of adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard, the prognosis of pancreatic cancers still remains poor. The NEPAFOX trial evaluated perioperative treatment with FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicenter phase II trial randomized patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer without metastases into arm (A,) upfront surgery plus adjuvant gemcitabine, or arm (B,) perioperative FOLFIRINOX. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Owing to poor accrual, recruitment was prematurely stopped after randomization of 40 of the planned 126 patients (A: 21, B: 19). Overall, approximately three-quarters were classified as primarily resectable (A: 16, B: 15), and the remaining patients were classified as borderline resectable (A: 5, B: 4). Of the 12 evaluable patients, 3 achieved partial response under neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Of the 21 patients in arm A and 19 patients in arm B, 17 and 7 underwent curative surgery, and R0-resection was achieved in 77% and 71%, respectively. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 72% in arm A and 46% in arm B, whereas non-surgical toxicity was comparable in both arms. Median RFS/PFS was almost doubled in arm B (14.1 months) compared with arm A (8.4 months) in the population with surgical resection, whereas median OS was comparable between both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the analysis was only descriptive owing to small patient numbers, no safety issues regarding surgical complications were observed in the perioperative FOLFIRINOX arm. Thus, considering the small number of patients, perioperative treatment approach appears feasible and potentially effective in well-selected cohorts of patients. In pancreatic cancer, patient selection before initiation of neoadjuvant therapy appears to be critical.

Surrogacy of Recurrence-free Survival for Overall Survival as an Endpoint of Clinical Trials of Perioperative Adjuvant Therapy in Hepatobiliary-pancreatic Cancers: A Retrospective Study and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the correlation between recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in the hepatobiliary-pancreatic (HBP) surgical setting to validate RFS as a surrogate endpoint.

BACKGROUND

Reliable surrogate endpoints for OS are still limited in the field of HBP surgery.

METHODS

We analyzed patients who underwent curative resection for HBP disease [986 patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), 1168 with biliary tract cancer (BTC), 1043 with hepatocellular carcinoma, and 1071 with colorectal liver metastasis] from September 2002 to June 2022. We also conducted meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy to validate the surrogacy in PDAC and BTC.

RESULTS

Correlation coefficients between RFS and OS were low for hepatocellular carcinoma ( p = 0.67) and colorectal liver metastasis ( p = 0.53) but strong for PDAC ( p = 0.80) and BTC ( p = 0.75). In a landmark analysis, the concordance rates between survival or death at 5 years postoperatively and the presence or absence of recurrence at each time point (1, 2, 3, and 4 years) were 50%, 70%, 74%, and 77% for PDAC and 54%, 67%, 73%, and 78% for BTC, respectively, both increasing and reaching a plateau at 3 years. In a meta-analysis, the correlation coefficients for the RFS hazard ratio and OS hazard ratio in PDAC and BTC were p = 0.88 ( P < 0.001) and p = 0.87 ( P < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-year RFS can be a reliable surrogate endpoint for OS in clinical trials of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy for PDAC and BTC.

Postoperative tumor treatment strategies: From basic research to clinical therapy

Despite progression in advanced treatments for malignant tumors, surgery remains the primary treatment intervention, which removes a large portion of firm tumor tissues; however, the postoperative phase poses a possible risk for provincial tumor recurrence and metastasis. Consequently, the prevention of tumor recurrence and metastasis has attracted research attention. In this review, we summarized the postoperative treatment strategies for various tumors from both basic research and clinical perspectives. We delineated the underlying factors contributing to the recurrence of malignant tumors with a substantial prevalence rate, related molecular mechanisms of tumor recurrence post‐surgery, and related means of monitoring recurrence and metastasis after surgery. Furthermore, we described relevant therapeutic approaches for postoperative tumor recurrence, including chemotherapy, radiation therapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and photodynamic therapy. This review focused on the emerging technologies used for postoperative tumor treatment in recent years in terms of functional classification, including the prevention of postoperative tumor recurrence, functional reconstruction, and monitoring of recurrence. Finally, we discussed the future development and deficiencies of postoperative tumor therapy. To understand postoperative treatment strategies for tumors from clinical treatment and basic research and further guide the research directions for postoperative tumors.

Adjuvant Chemotherapy With or Without Radiotherapy for Resected Pancreatic Cancer After Multiagent Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant therapy is associated with improved pancreatic cancer survival after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery. However, whether adjuvant treatment should include radiotherapy is unclear in this setting.

METHODS

This study queried the National Cancer Database for pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients who underwent curative resection after multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy between 2010 and 2019 and received adjuvant treatment. Adjuvant chemotherapy plus radiotherapy (external beam, 45-50.4 gray) was compared with adjuvant chemotherapy alone. Uni- and multivariable Cox regression was used to assess survival associations. Analyses were repeated in a propensity score-matched subgroup.

RESULTS

Of 1983 patients who received adjuvant treatment after multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection, 1502 (75.7%) received adjuvant chemotherapy alone and 481 (24.3%) received concomitant adjuvant radiotherapy (chemoradiotherapy). The patients treated with adjuvant chemoradiotherapy were younger, were treated at non-academic facilities more often, and had higher rates of lymph node metastasis (ypN1-2), positive resection margins (R1), and lymphovascular invasion (LVI+). The median survival was shorter for the chemoradiotherapy-treated patients according to the unadjusted analysis (26.8 vs 33.2 months; p = 0.0017). After adjustment for confounders, chemoradiotherapy was associated with better outcomes in the multivariable model (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.61-0.93; p = 0.008). The association between chemoradiotherapy and improved outcomes was stronger for the patients with grade III tumors (HR, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.37-0.74) or LVI+ tumors (HR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.75). In a subgroup of 396 propensity-matched patients, chemoradiotherapy was associated with a survival benefit only for the patients with LVI+ or grade III tumors.

CONCLUSION

After multiagent neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection for pancreatic cancer, additional adjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus adjuvant chemotherapy alone is associated with improved survival for patients with LVI+ or grade III tumors.

Examining neoadjuvant treatment candidates in resectable pancreatic cancer based on tumor-vessel interactions and CA 19-9 levels: a retrospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

The applicability of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has arisen, however, high-level evidence is lacking. This study aimed to explore patient subgroups with high-risk resectable PDAC for selecting candidates who may benefit from NAT.

METHODS

The 1132 patients with resectable or borderline resectable PDAC who underwent surgery between 2007 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with resectable PDAC without contact of major vessels (R-no contact) ( n =651), with contact of portal vein or superior mesenteric vein (PV/SMV) ≤180° (R-contact) ( n =306), and borderline resectable PDAC without arterial involvement (BR-V) ( n =175) were analyzed.

RESULTS

The mean age was 64.3±9.8 years, and 647 patients (57.2%) were male. The median follow-up was 26 months in the entire cohort. Patients with resectable PDAC without vascular contact had the most improved overall survival (OS) (median; 31.5 months). OS did not significantly differ between NAT and upfront surgery in the entire resectable PDAC cohort. However, in R-contact group, NAT showed significantly improved OS compared to upfront surgery (33 vs. 23 months). Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was showed a better OS than gemcitabine-based regimens in patients who underwent NAT (34 vs. 24 months). NAT was associated with a better survival in the patients with CA 19-9 level ≥150 U/ml, only when the tumor has PV/SMV contact in resectable disease (40 vs. 19 months, P =0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

NAT can be considered as an effective treatment in patients with resectable PDAC, particularly when the tumor is in contact with PV/SMV and CA 19-9 ≥150 U/ml.

The Role of Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is an aggressive malignancy. Recurrences are very high despite high-quality surgery necessitating adjuvant therapy. The evolution of adjuvant therapy took several decades and gradually evolved from single-agent chemotherapy to multi-agent chemotherapy. The two important agents that are active in pancreatic cancer are 5-fluorouracil and gemcitabine, and with several combinations showing better results in the subsequent trials, the most recent trial PRODIGE 24 shows a median survival of 54.4 months. The role of neoadjuvant therapy is still evolving in resectable cancers. The role of adjuvant radiotherapy is not well defined due to controversial results from historical trials.

Evidence and Future Perspectives for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Scoping Review

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a lethal disease that requires innovative therapeutic approaches to enhance the survival outcomes. Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) has gained attention for resectable and borderline resectable PC, offering improved resection rates and enabling early intervention and patient selection. Several retrospective studies have validated its efficacy. However, previous studies have lacked intention-to-treat analyses and appropriate resectability classifications. Randomized comparative trials may help to enhance the clinical applicability of evidence. Therefore, after searching the MEDLINE database, this scoping review presents a comprehensive summary of the evidence from published (n = 14) and ongoing (n = 12) randomized Phase II and III trials. Diverse regimens and their outcomes were explored for both resectable and borderline resectable PC. While some trials have supported the efficacy of NAT, others have demonstrated no clear survival benefits for patients with resectable PC. The utility of NAT has been confirmed in patients with borderline resectable PC, but the optimal regimens remain debatable. Ongoing trials are investigating novel regimens, including immunotherapy, thereby highlighting the dynamic landscape of PC treatment. Studies should focus on biomarker identification, which may enable precision in oncology. Future endeavors aim to refine treatment strategies, guided by precision oncology.

Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: Transatlantic Trend and Postoperative Outcomes Analysis

BACKGROUND

The introduction of modern chemotherapy a decade ago has led to increased use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A recent North American study demonstrated increased use of NAT and improved operative outcomes in patients with PDAC. The aims of this study were to compare the use of NAT and short-term outcomes in patients with PDAC undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) among registries from the US and Canada, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden.

STUDY DESIGN

Databases from 2 multicenter (voluntary) and 2 nationwide (mandatory) registries were queried from 2018 to 2020. Patients undergoing PD for PDAC were compared based on the use of upfront surgery vs NAT. Adoption of NAT was measured in each country over time. Thirty-day outcomes, including the composite measure (ideal outcomes), were compared by multivariable analyses. Sensitivity analyses of patients undergoing vascular resection were performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 11,402 patients underwent PD for PDAC with 33.7% of patients receiving NAT. The use of NAT increased steadily from 28.3% in 2018 to 38.5% in 2020 (p < 0.0001). However, use of NAT varied widely by country: the US (46.8%), the Netherlands (44.9%), Sweden (11.0%), and Germany (7.8%). On multivariable analysis, NAT was significantly (p < 0.01) associated with reduced rates of serious morbidity, clinically relevant pancreatic fistulae, reoperations, and increased ideal outcomes. These associations remained on sensitivity analysis of patients undergoing vascular resection.

CONCLUSIONS

NAT before PD for pancreatic cancer varied widely among 4 Western audits yet increased by 26% during 3 years. NAT was associated with improved short-term outcomes.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines

For patients with locoregionally confined pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), margin-negative surgical resection is the only known curative treatment; however, the majority of patients are not operable candidates at initial diagnosis. Among patients with resectable disease who undergo surgery alone, the 5-year survival remains poor. Adjuvant therapies, including systemic therapy or chemoradiation, are utilized as they improve locoregional control and overall survival. There has been increasing interest in the use of neoadjuvant therapy to obtain early control of occult metastatic disease, allow local tumor response to facilitate margin-negative resection, and provide a test of time and biology to assist with the selection of candidates most likely to benefit from radical surgical resection. However, limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options. In this systematic review, the American Radium Society multidisciplinary gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria evaluating the evidence regarding neoadjuvant treatment for patients with PDAC, including surgery, systemic therapy, and radiotherapy, in terms of oncologic outcomes and quality of life. The evidence was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design framework and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included phases 2 to 3 trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2012 and December 30, 2022 in the Ovid Medline database. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined to guide practitioners in the management of patients with PDAC.

Comparison of neoadjuvant treatment and surgery first for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Current treatment recommendations for resectable or borderline pancreatic carcinoma support upfront surgery and adjuvant therapy. However, neoadjuvant therapy (NT) seems to increase prognosis of pancreatic carcinoma and come to everyone's attention gradually. Randomized controlled trials offering comparison with the NT are lacking and optimal neoadjuvant treatment regimen still remains uncertain. This study aims to compare both treatment strategies for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

The PRISMA checklist was used as a guide to systematically review relevant peer-reviewed literature reporting primary data analysis. We searched PubMed, Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Datebase and related reviews for randomized controlled trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy with surgery first for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma. We estimated relative hazard ratios (HRs) for median overall survival and ratios risks (RRs) for microscopically complete (R0) resection among different neoadjuvant regimens and major complications. We assessed the effects of neoadjuvant therapy on R0 resection rate and median overall survival with Bayesian analysis.

RESULTS

Thirteen eligible articles were included. Eight studies performed comparison neoadjuvant therapy with surgery first, and R0 resection rate was recorded in seven studies. Compared with surgery first, neoadjuvant therapy did increase the R0 resection rate (RR = 1.53, I2 = 0%, P< 0.00001), there was a certain possibility that gemcitabine + cisplatin (Gem+Cis) + Radiotherapy was the most favorable in terms of the fact that there was no significant difference concerning the results from the individual studies. In direct comparison, four studies were included and estimated that Neoadjuvant therapy improved mOS compared with upfront surgery (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.58-0.92; P = 0.012; I2 = 15%), after Bayesian analysis it seemed that regimen with Cisplatin/ Epirubicin then Gemcitabine/ Capecitabine (PEXG) was most likely the best with a relatively small sample size. The rate of major surgical complications was available for six studies and ranged from 11% to 56% with neoadjuvant therapy and 11% to 45% with surgery first. There was no significant difference between neoadjuvant therapy and surgery first, also with a high heterogeneity (RR = 0.96, 95%CI = 0.65-1.43; P = 0.85; I2 = 46%).

CONCLUSION

In conclusion neoadjuvant therapy might offer benefit over up-front surgery. Neoadjuvant therapy increased the R0 resection rate with gemcitabine + cisplatin + Radiotherapy that was the most favorable and improved mOS with Cisplatin/ Epirubicin then Gemcitabine/ Capecitabine (PEXG) that was most likely the best.

Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

NORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49-71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62-84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2-34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6-not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00-2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46-67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55-83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2-34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4-not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99-2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event.

INTERPRETATION

This phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven.

FUNDING

Norwegian Cancer Society, South Eastern Norwegian Health Authority, The Sjöberg Foundation, and Helsinki University Hospital Research Grants.

Serum CEA as a Prognostic Marker for Overall Survival in Patients with Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and Non-Elevated CA19-9 Levels Treated with FOLFIRINOX as Initial Treatment: A TAPS Consortium Study

INTRODUCTION

About 25% of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma have non-elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels at baseline, hampering evaluation of response to preoperative treatment. Serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a potential alternative.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study from five referral centers included consecutive patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (2012-2019), treated with one or more cycles of (m)FOLFIRINOX, and non-elevated CA19-9 levels (i.e., < 37 U/mL) at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed to assess prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), including CEA level at baseline, restaging, and dynamics.

RESULTS

Overall, 277 patients were included in this study. CEA at baseline was elevated (≥5 ng/mL) in 53 patients (33%) and normalized following preoperative therapy in 14 patients (26%). In patients with elevated CEA at baseline, median OS in patients with CEA normalization following preoperative therapy was 33 months versus 19 months in patients without CEA normalization (p = 0.088). At time of baseline, only elevated CEA was independently associated with (worse) OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.98). At time of restaging, elevated CEA at baseline was still the only independent predictor for (worse) OS (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-1.98), whereas elevated CEA at restaging (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.77-1.77) was not.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum CEA was elevated in one-third of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma having non-elevated CA19-9 at baseline. At both time of baseline and time of restaging, elevated serum CEA measured at baseline was the only predictor for (worse) OS. Therefore, serum CEA may be a useful tool for decision making at both initial staging and time of restaging in patients with non-elevated CA19-9.

WT1 Cancer Vaccine in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review

Advanced pancreatic cancer is one of the prominent contributors to cancer-related mortality globally. Chemotherapy, especially gemcitabine, is generally used for the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Despite the treatment, the fatality rate for advanced pancreatic cancer is alarmingly high. Thus, the dire need for better treatment alternatives has drawn focus to cancer vaccinations. The Wilms tumor gene (WT1), typically associated with Wilms tumor, is found to be excessively expressed in some cancers, such as pancreatic cancer. This characteristic feature is harvested to develop cancer vaccines against WT1. This review aims to systematically summarize the clinical trials investigating the efficacy and safety of WT1 vaccines in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. An extensive literature search was conducted on databases Medline, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar using the keywords "Advanced pancreatic cancer," "Cancer vaccines," "WT1 vaccines," and "Pulsed DC vaccines," and the results were exclusively studied to construct this review. WT1 vaccines work by introducing peptides from the WT1 protein to trigger an immune response involving cytotoxic T lymphocytes via antigen-presenting cells. Upon activation, these lymphocytes induce apoptosis in cancer cells by specifically targeting those with increased WT1 levels. WT1 vaccinations, which are usually given in addition to chemotherapy, have demonstrated clinically positive results and minimal side effects. However, there are several challenges to their widespread use, such as the immunosuppressive nature of tumors and heterogeneity in expression. Despite these limitations, the risk-benefit profile of cancer vaccines is encouraging, especially for the WT1 vaccine in the treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer. Considering the fledgling status of their development, large multicentric, variables-matched, extensive analysis across diverse demographics is considered essential.

Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Literature Review and Our Experience of NAC-GS

In addition to established evidence of the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), evidence of the effects of neoadjuvant treatments (NATs), including chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, has also been accumulating. Recent results from prospective studies and meta-analyses suggest that NATs may be beneficial not only for borderline resectable PDAC, but also for resectable PDAC, by increasing the likelihood of successful R0 resection, decreasing the likelihood of the development of lymph node metastasis, and improving recurrence-free and overall survival. In addition, response to NAT may be informative for predicting the clinical course after preoperative NAT followed by surgery; in this way, the postoperative treatment strategy can be revised based on the effect of NAT and the post-neoadjuvant therapy/surgery histopathological findings. On the other hand, the response to NAT and AC is also influenced by the tumor biology and the patient's immune/nutritional status; therefore, planning of the treatment strategy and meticulous management of NAT, surgery, and AC is required on a patient-by-patient basis. Our experience of using gemcitabine plus S-1 showed that this NAT regimen achieved tumor shrinkage and decreased the levels of tumor markers but failed to provide a survival benefit. Our results also suggested that response/adverse events to NAT may be predictive of the efficacy of AC, as well as survival outcomes.

Reconsidering resectable oncological conditions in pancreatic tail cancer: A multicenter retrospective study on prognostic factors in pancreatic tail cancer after resection (HOPS Pt-01)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic tail cancer (Pt-PC) is generally considered resectable when metastasis is absent, but doubts persist in clinical practice due to the variability in local tumor extent. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to comprehensively identify prognostic factors associated with Pt-PC after resection.

METHODS

We enrolled 100 patients that underwent distal pancreatectomy. The optimal combination of factors influencing relapse-free survival (RFS) was determined using the maximum likelihood method (MLM) and corrected Akaike and Bayesian information criteria (AICc and BIC). Prognostic elements were then validated to predict oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Therapeutic interventions included neoadjuvant treatment in 16 patients and concomitant visceral resection (CVR) in 37 patients; 89 patients achieved R0. Median RFS and OS after surgery were 23.1 and 37.1 months, respectively. AICc/BIC were minimized in the model with ASA-PS (≥2), CA19-9 (≥112 U/mL at baseline, non-normalized postoperatively), need for CVR, 6 pathological items (tumor diameter ≥19.5 mm, histology G1, invasion of the anterior pancreatic border, splenic vein invasion, splenic artery invasion, lymph node metastasis), and completed adjuvant treatment (cAT) for RFS. Regarding the predictive value of these 11 factors, area under the curve was 0.842 for 5-year RFS. Multivariate analysis of these 11 factors showed that predictors of RFS include CVR (hazard ratio, 2.13; 95 % confidence interval, 1.08-4.19; p = 0.028) and cAT (0.38, 0.19-0.76; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The MLM identified certain Pt-PC cases warranting consideration beyond resectable during clinical management. Particular attention should be paid to conditions requiring CVR, even though immortal time bias remains unresolved with adjuvant treatment.

Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Versus Upfront Surgery for Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: An Updated Nationwide Study

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to assess the association of survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

BACKGROUND

The early control of potential micrometastases and patient selection using NAC has been advocated for patients with PDAC. However, the role of NAC for resectable PDAC remains unclear.

METHODS

Patients with clinical T1 and T2 PDAC were identified in the National Cancer Database from 2010 to 2017. Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox regression models were used to compare survival. To address immortal time bias, landmark analysis was performed. Interactions between preoperative factors and NAC were investigated in subgroup analyses. A propensity score analysis was performed to compare survival between multiagent NAC and upfront surgery.

RESULTS

In total, 4041 patients were treated with upfront surgery and 1,175 patients were treated with NAC (79.4% multiagent NAC, 20.6% single-agent NAC). Using a landmark time of 6 months after diagnosis, patients treated with multiagent NAC had longer median overall survival compared with upfront surgery and single-agent NAC. (35.8 vs 27.1 vs 27.4 mo). Multiagent NAC was associated with lower mortality rates compared with upfront surgery (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.85), whereas single-agent NAC was not. The association of survival with multiagent NAC were consistent in analyses using the matched data sets. Interaction analysis revealed that the association between multiagent NAC and a lower mortality rate did not significantly differ across age, facility type, tumor location, CA 19-9 levels, and clinical T/N stages.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that multiagent NAC followed by resection is associated with improved survival compared with upfront surgery.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for early-stage colon cancer

Surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy is the standard treatment for early-stage colon cancer. However, evidence has recently emerged for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, with the results of randomised clinical trials sparking debates within multidisciplinary teams and splitting the gastrointestinal oncology community. Further to a systematic search of the literature, we provide a thorough and in-depth analysis of the findings from these trials, highlighting the advantages and disadvantages of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We conclude that, while there is a potential value of moving systemic therapy from the post-operative to the pre-operative setting, the available evidence does not justify a shift in the treatment paradigm of early-stage colon cancer, and surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy should remain the standard approach for these patients.

Anatomical and Biological Considerations to Determine Resectability in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains associated with poor outcomes with a 5-year survival of 12% across all stages of the disease. These poor outcomes are driven by a delay in diagnosis and an early propensity for systemic dissemination of the disease. Recently, aggressive surgical approaches involving complex vascular resections and reconstructions have become more common, thus allowing more locally advanced tumors to be resected. Unfortunately, however, even after the completion of surgery and systemic therapy, approximately 40% of patients experience early recurrence of disease. To determine resectability, many institutions utilize anatomical staging systems based on the presence and extent of vascular involvement of major abdominal vessels around the pancreas. However, these classification systems are based on anatomical considerations only and do not factor in the burden of systemic disease. By integrating the biological criteria, we possibly could avoid futile resections often associated with significant morbidity. Especially patients with anatomically resectable disease who have a heavy burden of radiologically undetected systemic disease most likely do not derive a survival benefit from resection. On the contrary, we could offer complex resections to those who have locally advanced or oligometastatic disease but have favorable systemic biology and are most likely to benefit from resection. This review summarizes the current literature on defining anatomical and biological resectability in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Perioperative NALIRIFOX in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: The open-label, multicenter, phase II nITRO trial

BACKGROUND

Upfront surgery followed by postoperative treatment is a commonly adopted treatment for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (rPDAC). However, the risk of positive surgical margins, the poor recovery that often impairs postoperative treatments, and the risk of recurrence might limit the outcome of this strategy. This study evaluated the safety and the activity of liposomal irinotecan 50 mg/m2 + 5-fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 + leucovorin 400 mg/m2 + oxaliplatin 60 mg/m2 (NALIRIFOX) in the perioperative treatment of patients with rPDAC.

METHODS

Eligible patients had a rPDAC with < 180° interface with major veins' wall. Patients received 3 cycles before and 3 cycles after resection with NALIRIFOX, days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients undergoing an R0 resection.

RESULTS

107 patients began preoperative treatment. Nine patients discontinued the treatment because of related or unrelated adverse events. Disease-control rate was 92.9%. 87 patients underwent surgical exploration, 11 had intraoperative evidence of metastatic disease, and 1 died for surgical complications. R0 resection rate was 65.3%. 49 patients completed the three postoperative cycles. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were diarrhea and neutropenia. Median overall survival (OS) of ITT patients was 32.3 months (95% CI 27.8-44.3). Median disease-free and OS from surgery of resected patients were 19.3 (95% CI 12.6-34.1) and 40.3 months (95% CI 29-NA), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Perioperative NALIRIFOX was manageable and active, and deserves further investigation in randomized trials comparing it with standard upfront surgery followed by adjuvant therapy.

Systemic treatments in pancreatic cancer: Taiwan pancreas society recommendation

Pancreatic cancer is a highly aggressive malignancy with a poor prognosis. Over the past decade, significant therapeutic advancements have improved the survival rates of patients with pancreatic cancer. One of the primary factors contributing to these positive outcomes is the evolution of chemotherapy, from monotherapy to doublet or triplet regimens, and the integration of multimodal approaches. Additionally, targeted agents tailored to patients with specific genetic alterations and the development of cell therapies show promise in benefiting certain subpopulations. This article focuses on examining pivotal studies that explore the role of chemotherapy in neoadjuvant, adjuvant, maintenance, and salvage settings; highlights interesting findings related to cell therapy; and provides an overview of ongoing trials concerning metastatic settings. This review primarily aimed to offer recommendations based on therapeutic evidence, recent advancements in new treatment combinations, and the most innovative approaches. A unique aspect of this review is the inclusion of published papers on clinical trials and real-world data in Taiwan, thus adding a valuable perspective to the overall analysis.

Portomesenteric venous contact ≤180° and overall survival in resectable head and body pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with upfront surgery

INTRODUCTION

Upfront surgery is the standard of care for resectable pancreatic cancer, defined as the absence of or ≤180° tumour contact with the portal/superior mesenteric vein. We hypothesized that portomesenteric venous tumour contact is prognostically unfavourable and aimed to assess whether it is associated with poorer survival compared with no venous contact in resectable head and body pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This single-centre retrospective study included patients undergoing upfront surgery for resectable head and body pancreatic cancer in 2010-2020 at Umeå University Hospital, Sweden. No venous contact was compared with portomesenteric venous contact of ≤180° based on preoperative imaging. Overall survival on an intention-to-treat basis was compared with Kaplan-Meier curves, a log-rank test and Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The final study cohort included 39 patients with portomesenteric venous tumour contact and 144 patients without venous tumour contact. Patients with venous tumour contact had a median overall survival of 15.3 months compared to 23.0 months (log rank P = 0.059). Portomesenteric venous tumour contact was an independent negative prognostic factor for survival in the multivariable Cox model (HR 1.68; 95% CI 1.11-2.55, P = 0.014) and was associated with higher rates of microscopically non-radical resections (R1) (50% vs 26.1%, P = 0.012) and pathological lymph node metastasis (76.7% vs 56.8%, P = 0.012). There was no difference in adjuvant chemotherapy receipt or postoperative complications between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Portomesenteric venous tumour contact is associated with poorer overall survival and higher rates of R1 resections and lymph node metastasis in patients with resectable head and body pancreatic cancer treated with upfront surgery.

Current clinical practice in the management of Brazilian patients with potentially resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to describe the routine clinical practice of physicians involved in the treatment of patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in Brazil.

METHODS

Physicians were invited through email and text messages to participate in an electronic survey sponsored by the Brazilian Gastrointestinal Tumor Group (GTG) and the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO). We evaluated the relationship between variable categories numerically with false discovery rate-adjusted Fisher's exact test p values and graphically with Multiple Correspondence Analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 255 physicians answered the survey. Most (52.5%) were medical oncologists, treated patients predominantly in the private setting (71.0%), and had access to multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTDTB; 76.1%). Medical oncologists were more likely to describe neoadjuvant therapy as beneficial in the resectable setting and surgeons in the borderline resectable setting. Most physicians would use information on risk factors for early recurrence, frailty, and type of surgery to decide treatment strategy. Doctors working predominantly in public institutions were less likely to have access to MTDTB and to consider FOLFIRINOX the most adequate regimen in the neoadjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences exist in the management of localized PDAC, some of them possibly explained by the medical specialty, but also by the funding source of health care.

Survival benefit and impact of adjuvant chemotherapy following systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with resected pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are increasingly receiving systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), particularly those with borderline resectable and locally advanced disease. However, the specific role of additional adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) in these patients is unknown. The objective of this study is to further assess the clinical benefit and impact of systemic AC in patients with resected PDAC after NAC.

METHODS

Data on PDAC patients with or without AC following systemic NAC and surgical resection were retrospectively retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2006 and 2019. A matched cohort was created using propensity score matching (PSM), and baseline characteristics were balanced to reduce bias. Overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS) were calculated using matching cohorts.

RESULTS

The study enrolled a total of 1589 patients, with 623 (39.2%) in the AC group and 966 (51.8%) in the non-AC group [mean age, 64.0 (9.9) years; 766 (48.2%) were females and 823 (51.8%) were males]. All patients received NAC, and among the crude population, 582 (36.6%) received neoadjuvant radiotherapy, while 168 (10.6%) received adjuvant radiotherapy. Following the 1:1 PSM, 597 patients from each group were evaluated further. The AC and non-AC groups had significantly different median OS (30.0 vs. 25.0 months, P =0.002) and CSS (33.0 vs. 27.0 months, P =0.004). After multivariate Cox regression analysis, systemic AC was independently associated with improved survival ( P =0.003, HR=0.782; 95% CI, 0.667-0.917 for OS; P =0.004, HR=0.784; 95% CI, 0.663-0.926 for CSS), and age, tumor grade, and AJCC N staging were also independent predictors of survival. Only patients younger than 65 years old and those with a pathological N1 category showed a significant association between systemic AC and improved survival in the subgroup analysis adjusted for these covariates.

CONCLUSION

Systemic AC provides a significant survival benefit in patients with resected PDAC following NAC compared to non-AC patients. Our study discovered that younger patients, patients with aggressive tumors and potentially well response to NAC might benefit from AC to achieve prolonged survival after curative tumor resection.

Peritoneal Cell-Free Tumor DNA is a Biomarker of Locoregional and Peritoneal Recurrence in Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

Recurrence after curative-intent pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) is quite frequent with locoregional and peritoneal recurrence in about one-third of cases. We hypothesize that peritoneal cell-free tumor DNA (ptDNA) present in the intraoperative peritoneal lavage (PL) fluid may be used as a predictive biomarker of locoregional and peritoneal recurrence.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Under institutional review board (IRB)-approved protocol, pre- and postresection PL fluids were collected from PDAC patients undergoing curative-intent pancreatectomy. PL fluids from PDAC patients with pathologically proven peritoneal metastasis were also collected as positive controls. Cell-free DNA was extracted from PL fluids. Droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) was performed using ddPCR KRAS G12/G13 screening kit. Recurrence-free survival (RFS) based on KRAS-mutant ptDNA level was determined using Kaplan-Meier methods.

RESULTS

KRAS-mutant ptDNA was detected in PL fluids from all PDAC patients. KRAS-mutant ptDNA was detected in 11/21 (52%) preresection and 15/18 (83%) postresection PL fluid samples. With a median follow-up of 23.6 months, 12 patients developed recurrence (8 locoregional/peritoneal recurrence, 9 pulmonary/hepatic recurrence); 5/8 (63%) and 6/6 (100%) patients with mutant allele frequency (MAF) of > 0.10% in pre- and postresection PL fluids, respectively, developed recurrence. Using a cutoff value of 0.10% MAF, the presence of KRAS-mutant ptDNA in postresection PL fluid predicted a significantly shortened time to locoregional and peritoneal recurrence (median RFS of 8.9 months versus not reached, P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that ptDNA in postresection PL fluids may be a useful biomarker to predict locoregional and peritoneal recurrence in resected PDAC patients.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Role of Total Pancreatectomy as an Alternative to Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients at High Risk for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula: Is it a Justifiable Indication?

OBJECTIVE

Examine the potential benefit of total pancreatectomy (TP) as an alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in patients at high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

TP is mentioned as an alternative to PD in patients at high risk for POPF, but a systematic review is lacking.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analyses using Pubmed, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library to identify studies published up to October 2022, comparing elective single-stage TP for any indication versus PD in patients at high risk for POPF. The primary endpoint was short-term mortality. Secondary endpoints were major morbidity (i.e., Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) on the short-term and quality of life.

RESULTS

After screening 1212 unique records, five studies with 707 patients (334 TP and 373 high-risk PD) met the eligibility criteria, comprising one randomized controlled trial and four observational studies. The 90-day mortality after TP and PD did not differ (6.3% vs. 6.2%; RR=1.04 [95%CI 0.56-1.93]). Major morbidity rate was lower after TP compared to PD (26.7% vs. 38.3%; RR=0.65 [95%CI 0.48-0.89]), but no significance was seen in matched/randomized studies (29.0% vs. 36.9%; RR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.48-1.10]). Two studies investigated quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) at a median of 30-52 months, demonstrating comparable global health status after TP and PD (77% [±15] vs. 76% [±20]; P =0.857).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found no reduction in short-term mortality and major morbidity after TP as compared to PD in patients at high risk for POPF. However, if TP is used as a bail-out procedure, the comparable long-term quality of life is reassuring.

Neo-Adjuvant Treatment in Primary Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and PRISMA-Compliant Updated Metanalysis of Oncological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in treatment, the prognosis of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains poor. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has gained great interest in hopes of improving survival. However, the results of available studies based on different treatment approaches, such as chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, showed contrasting results. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to clarify the benefit of NAT compared to upfront surgery (US) in primarily resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A PRISMA literature review identified 139 studies, of which 15 were finally included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. All data from eligible articles was summarized in a systematic summary and then used for the meta-analysis. Specifically, we used HR for OS and DFS and risk estimates (odds ratios) for the R0 resection rate and the N+ rate. The risk of bias was correctly assessed according to the nature of the studies included.

RESULTS

From the pooled HRs, OS for NAT patients was better, with an HR for death of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.90) at a significance level of less than 1%. In the sub-group analysis, no difference was found between patients treated with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy exclusively. The meta-analysis of seven studies that reported DFS for NAT resulted in a pooled HR for progression of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.56-0.79) with a significance level of less than 1%. A significantly lower risk of positive lymph nodes (OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.32-0.63) and an improved R0 resection rate (OR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.23-2.36) were also found in patients treated with NAT, despite high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

NAT is associated with improved survival for patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, the optimal treatment strategy has yet to be defined, and further studies are required.

How A Patient with Resectable or Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer should Be Treated-A Comprehensive Review

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive disease with high morbidity and mortality in which long-term survival rates remain disastrous. Surgical resection is the only potentially curable treatment for early pancreatic cancer; however, the right patient qualification is crucial for optimizing treatment outcomes. With the rapid development of radiographic and surgical techniques, resectability decisions are made by a multidisciplinary team. Upfront surgery (Up-S) can improve the survival of patients with potentially resectable disease with the support of adjuvant therapy (AT). However, early recurrences are quite common due to the often-undetectable micrometastases occurring before surgery. Adopted by international consensus in 2017, the standardization of the definitions of resectable PDAC (R-PDAC) and borderline resectable PDAC (BR-PDAC) disease was necessary to enable accurate interpretation of study results and define which patients could benefit from neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). NAT is expected to improve the resection rate with a negative margin to provide significant local control and eliminate micrometastases to prolong survival. Providing information about optimal sequential multimodal NAT seems to be key for future studies. This article presents a multidisciplinary concept for the therapeutic management of patients with R-PDAC and BR-PDAC based on current knowledge and our own experience.

Surgical Treatment of Gastrointestinal Cancers

Even though there have been remarkable advances in systemic treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies over the last few decades, in the vast majority of instances, surgery remains the sole therapeutic approach offering a chance for a definite cure [...].

Focus on Therapeutic Options for Surgically Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Based on Novel Biomarkers

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma remains associated with a poor prognosis, even when diagnosed at an early stage. Consequently, it is imperative to carefully consider the available therapeutic options and tailor them based on clinically relevant biomarkers. In our comprehensive review, we specifically concentrated on the identification of novel predictive and prognostic markers that have the potential to be integrated into multiparametric scoring systems. These scoring systems aim to accurately predict the efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in surgically resectable pancreatic cancer cases. By identifying robust predictive markers, we can enhance our ability to select patients who are most likely to benefit from neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Furthermore, the identification of prognostic markers can provide valuable insights into the overall disease trajectory and inform treatment decisions. The development of multiparametric scoring systems that incorporate these markers holds great promise for optimizing the selection of patients for neoadjuvant chemotherapy, leading to improved outcomes in resectable pancreatic neoplasia. Continued research efforts are needed to validate and refine these markers and scoring systems, ultimately advancing the field of personalized medicine in pancreatic adenocarcinoma management.

Improved Therapeutic Delivery Targeting Clinically Relevant Orthotopic Human Pancreatic Tumors Engrafted in Immunocompromised Pigs Using Ultrasound-Induced Cavitation: A Pilot Study

Pancreatic tumors can be resistant to drug penetration due to high interstitial fluid pressure, dense stroma, and disarrayed vasculature. Ultrasound-induced cavitation is an emerging technology that may overcome many of these limitations. Low-intensity ultrasound, coupled with co-administered cavitation nuclei consisting of gas-stabilizing sub-micron scale SonoTran Particles, is effective at increasing therapeutic antibody delivery to xenograft flank tumors in mouse models. Here, we sought to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach in situ using a large animal model that mimics human pancreatic cancer patients. Immunocompromised pigs were surgically engrafted with human Panc-1 pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) tumors in targeted regions of the pancreas. These tumors were found to recapitulate many features of human PDAC tumors. Animals were intravenously injected with the common cancer therapeutics Cetuximab, gemcitabine, and paclitaxel, followed by infusion with SonoTran Particles. Select tumors in each animal were targeted with focused ultrasound to induce cavitation. Cavitation increased the intra-tumor concentrations of Cetuximab, gemcitabine, and paclitaxel by 477%, 148%, and 193%, respectively, compared to tumors that were not targeted with ultrasound in the same animals. Together, these data show that ultrasound-mediated cavitation, when delivered in combination with gas-entrapping particles, improves therapeutic delivery in pancreatic tumors under clinically relevant conditions.

Preoperative treatments in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: current evidence and new perspectives

Surgery is the only curative treatment for non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but less than 20% of patients present a resectable disease at diagnosis. Treatment strategies and disease definition for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) vary in the different cancer centres. Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) is the standard of care for both BRPC and LAPC patients, however literature data are still controversial concerning the type, dose and duration of the different CT regimens, as well as regarding the integration of radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT) in the therapeutic algorithm. In this unsettled debate, we aimed at focusing on the therapeutic regimens currently in use and relative literature data, to report international trials comparing the available therapeutic options or explore the introduction of new pharmacological agents, and to analyse possible new scenarios in microenvironment evaluation before and after neoadjuvant therapies or in patients' selection at a molecular level.

Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer

Patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are best treated with surgical resection of the primary tumour and systemic chemotherapy, which provides considerably longer overall survival (OS) durations than either modality alone. Regardless, most patients will have disease relapse owing to micrometastatic disease. Although currently a matter of some debate, considerable research interest has been focused on the role of neoadjuvant therapy for all forms of resectable PDAC. Whilst adjuvant combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for patients with resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy seems to improve OS without necessarily increasing the resection rate in those with borderline-resectable disease. Furthermore, around 20% of patients with unresectable non-metastatic PDAC might undergo resection following 4-6 months of induction combination chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy, even in the absence of a clear radiological response, leading to improved OS outcomes in this group. Distinct molecular and biological responses to different types of therapies need to be better understood in order to enable the optimal sequencing of specific treatment modalities to further improve OS. In this Review, we describe current treatment strategies for the various clinical stages of PDAC and discuss developments that are likely to determine the optimal sequence of multimodality therapies by integrating the fundamental clinical and molecular features of the cancer.

Hot topics in pancreatic cancer management

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a sneaky and lethal disease burdened by poor prognosis. PDAC is often detected too late to be successfully cured, and it has been estimated that it will be a leading cause of cancer-related deaths in the near future. During the last decade, multimodal treatments involving surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy have contributed to improving the prognosis of this disease; however, long-term results are still not satisfactory. Postoperative morbidity and mortality rates remain high, and systemic treatments are burdened by toxicity in both neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings. Advancements in technologies, targeted therapies, immunotherapy and PDAC microenvironment modulation strategies may represent useful potential weapons in the future. Nevertheless, in the fight against this dreadful disease, there is an urgent need for new, cheap and user-friendly tools for early detection. In this field, promising results have been found in nanotechnologies and “omics” analyses that search for new biomarkers to be used in primary and secondary prevention. However, there are many issues that need to be solved before considering these tools in daily clinical practice. This editorial reported the state of the art of pancreatic cancer management.