Upfront resection versus neoadjuvant therapy for T1/T2 pancreatic cancer

Clinical Outcomes of Surgery after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Clinical outcomes of surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy have not been investigated for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), despite well-established outcomes in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with LAPC who underwent curative resection following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma between January 2017 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Among 1,358 patients, 260 underwent surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Among 356 LAPC patients, 98 (27.5%) and 147 (35.1%) of 418 BRPC patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Compared to resectable pancreatic cancer (resectable PC) with upfront surgery, both LAPC and BRPC exhibited higher rates of venous resection (28.6% vs. 49.0% vs. 4.0%), arterial resection (30.6% vs. 6.8% vs. 0.5%) and greater estimated blood loss (260.5 vs. 213.1 vs. 70.4 mL). However, hospital stay, readmission rates, and postoperative pancreatic fistula rates (grade B or C) did not differ significantly between LAPC, BRPC, and resectable PC. Overall and relapse-free survival did not differ significantly between LAPC and BRPC patients. The median overall survival was 37.3 months for LAPC and 37.0 months for BRPC. The median relapse-free survival was 22.7 months for LAPC and 26.0 months for BRPC.

CONCLUSION

Overall survival time and postoperative complications in LAPC patients who underwent curative resection following neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed similar results to those of BRPC patients. Further research is needed to identify specific sub-populations of LAPC patients who benefit most from conversion surgery and to minimize postoperative complications.

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.

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.

A novel risk-scoring system conducing to chemotherapy decision for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after pancreatectomy

Background: Chemotherapy is suggested to use in all stages of pancreatic cancer. Is it reasonable to recommend chemotherapy for all PDAC patients? It is necessary to distinguish low-risk PDAC patients underwent pancreatectomy, who may not lose survival time due to missed chemotherapy and not need to endure pain, nausea, tiredness, drowsiness, and breath shortness caused by chemotherapy. Methods: Nomograms were constructed with basis from the multivariate Cox regression analysis. X-tile software was utilized to perform risk stratification. Survival curves were used to display the effect of chemotherapy in different risk-stratification. Results: All of the significant variables were used to create the nomograms for overall survival (OS). The total risk score of each patient was calculated by summing the scores related to each variable. X-tile software was utilized to classify patients into high-risk (score >283), median-risk (197 Collapse

Key Words

• PDAC
• SEER database
• chemotherapy
• nomogram
• surgical resection

Collapse

MESH Headings Collapse

Grants Collapse

Affiliation(s)

Yuqiang Li Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China Department of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
Mengxiang Tian Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
Yuan Zhou Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
Fengbo Tan Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
Wenxue Liu Department of Cardiology, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China Department of Rheumatology, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, China
Lilan Zhao Department of Thoracic Surgery, Fujian Provincial Hospital, Fuzhou, China
Daniel Perez Department of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
Xiangping Song Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
Dan Wang Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China Department of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
Christine Nitschke Department of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
Qian Pei Department of General Surgery, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China
Cenap Güngör Department of General Visceral and Thoracic Surgery, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

Collapse