Effect of neoadjuvant therapy on local recurrence after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206:451-457. [PMID: 18308215 DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2007.10.002]

Radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: A review

BACKGROUND

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer constitutes a complex clinical entity, presenting the clinician with a locally aggressive disease that has a proclivity for distant spread. The benefits of radiation therapy, such as improved local control and improved survival, have been questioned. In this review we seek to summarize the existing evidence on radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and highlight future areas of research.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of PubMed for clinical studies reporting outcomes in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer was performed in June 2021, with an emphasis placed on prospective studies.

RESULTS

Radiologic "downstaging" in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is a rare event, although some evidence shows increased clinical response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy over radiation therapy. Margin status seems to be equivalent between regimens that use neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and regimens that include neoadjuvant radiation therapy. Local control in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is likely improved with radiation therapy; however, the benefit of improved local control in a disease marked by systemic failure has been questioned. Although some studies have shown improved survival with radiation therapy, differences in the delivery and tolerance of chemotherapy between the neoadjuvant and adjuvant setting confound these results. When the evidence is evaluated as a whole, there is no clear survival benefit of radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

Once considered a staple of therapy, the role of radiation therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is evolving as systemic therapy regimens continues to improve. Increased clinical understanding of disease phenotype and response are needed to accurately tailor therapy for individual patients and to improve outcomes in this complex patient population.

Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy is Associated With Improved Pathologic Outcomes and Survival in Resected Stage II-III Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Treated With Multiagent Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in the Modern Era

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CT) is being utilized more frequently in patients diagnosed with localized pancreatic cancer. The role of additional neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) remains undefined. We explored outcomes associated with neoadjuvant RT in the modern era.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (2010-2017) was queried for patients with clinical stage II-III pancreatic adenocarcinoma who received neoadjuvant multiagent systemic CT +/- RT. Demographics, pathologic outcomes, postoperative outcomes, and overall survival were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 5245 patients were included, of whom 3123 received CT and 1941 received CT + RT. Use of RT decreased over the 8-year study period. On multivariable analysis, treatment at academic facilities (odds ratio (OR) = 1.52, P < .001) and clinical T4 tumors (OR = 1.68, P < .001) were independently associated with receipt of RT. Patients treated with CT + RT had a higher frequency of ypT0-T2 tumors (35.8% vs. 22.7%) and a lower rate of ypT3-T4 tumors (57.3% vs. 72.8%; P < .001), lower rate of node-positive disease (36.6% vs. 59.8%, P < .001), and margin-positive resections (13.8% vs. 20.2%, P < .001), but slightly higher 90-day postoperative mortality (4.9% vs. 3.6%, P = .04). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy+ RT was associated with longer overall survival (32.7 vs. 29.8 months, P = .008), and remained independently associated with survival on multivariable analysis (HR = .85, P < .001).

DISCUSSION

In patients with stage II-III pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the addition of neoadjuvant RT to multiagent neoadjuvant CT may be associated with increased rates of node-negative and margin-negative resection, as well as improved overall survival.

Very Early Recurrence After Liver Resection for Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Considering Alternative Treatment Approaches

Importance

Although surgery offers the best chance of a potential cure for patients with localized, resectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC), prognosis of patients remains dismal largely because of a high incidence of recurrence.

Objective

To predict very early recurrence (VER) (ie, recurrence within 6 months after surgery) following resection for ICC in the pre- and postoperative setting.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Patients who underwent curative-intent resection for ICC between May 1990 and July 2016 were identified from an international multi-institutional database. The study was conducted at The Ohio State University in collaboration with all other participating institutions. The data were analyzed in December 2019.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Two logistic regression models were constructed to predict VER based on pre- and postoperative variables. The final models were used to develop an online calculator to predict VER and the tool was internally and externally validated.

Results

Among 880 patients (median age, 59 years [interquartile range, 51-68 years]; 388 women [44.1%]; 428 [50.2%] white; 377 [44.3%] Asian; 27 [3.2%] black]), 196 (22.3%) developed VER. The 5-year overall survival among patients with and without VER was 8.9% vs 49.8%, respectively (P < .001). A preoperative model was able to stratify patients relative to the risk for VER: low risk (6-month recurrence-free survival [RFS], 87.7%), intermediate risk (6-month RFS, 72.3%), and high risk (6-month RFS, 49.5%) (log-rank P < .001). The postoperative model similarly identified discrete cohorts of patients based on probability for VER: low risk (6-month RFS, 90.0%), intermediate risk (6-month RFS, 73.1%), and high risk (6-month RFS, 48.5%) (log-rank, P < .001). The calibration and predictive accuracy of the pre- and postoperative models were good in the training (C index: preoperative, 0.710; postoperative, 0.722) as well as the internal (C index: preoperative, 0.715; postoperative, 0.728; bootstrapping resamples, n = 5000) and external (C index: postoperative, 0.672) validation data sets.

Conclusion and Relevance

An easy-to-use online calculator was developed to help clinicians predict the chance of VER after curative-intent resection for ICC. The tool performed well on internal and external validation. This tool may help clinicians in the preoperative selection of patients for neoadjuvant therapy as well as during the postoperative period to inform surveillance strategies.

SPARC, a phase-I trial of pre-operative, margin intensified, stereotactic body radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Following resection of pancreatic cancer, risk of positive margins and local recurrence remain high, especially for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). We aimed to establish the maximum tolerated dose of a margin-intensified five-fraction stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) regimen designed to treat the region at risk.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a prospective multicentre phase-1 rolling-six dose-escalation study. BRPC patients received pre-operative SBRT, with one dose to the primary tumour and an integrated boost to the region where tumour was in contact with vasculature. Four dose-levels were proposed, with starting dose 30 Gy to primary PTV and 45 Gy to boost volume (PTV_R), in five daily fractions. Primary endpoint was maximum tolerated dose (MTD), defined as highest dose where zero of three or one of six patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT).

RESULTS

Twelve patients were registered, eleven received SBRT. Radiotherapy was well tolerated with all treatment completed as scheduled. Dose was escalated one level up from starting dose without encountering any DLT (prescribed 32.5 Gy PTV, 47.5 Gy PTV_R). Nine serious adverse reactions or events occurred (seven CTCAE Grade 3, two Grade 4). Two patients went on to have surgical resection. Median overall survival for SBRT patients was 8.1 months. The study closed early when it was unable to recruit to schedule.

CONCLUSION

Toxicity of SBRT was low for the two dose-levels that were tested, but MTD was not established. Few patients subsequently underwent resection of pancreatic tumour after SBRT, and it is difficult to draw conclusions regarding the safety or toxicity of these therapies in combination.

Detailed Analysis of Margin Positivity and the Site of Local Recurrence After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The association between a positive surgical margin and local recurrence after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been reported. Assessment of the location of the a positive margin and the specific site of local recurrence has not been well described.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database was queried for patients who underwent R0/R1 pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC between 2000 and 2015. The pancreatic, posterior, gastric/duodenal, anterior peritoneal, and bile duct margins were routinely assessed. Postoperative imaging was reviewed for the site of first recurrence, and local recurrence was defined as recurrence located in the remnant pancreas, surgical bed, or retroperitoneal site outside the surgical bed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 891 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, and 390 patients had an initial local recurrence with or without distant metastases. The 5-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence by site included the remnant pancreas (4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3-5%), the surgical bed (35%; 95% CI, 32-39%), and other regional retroperitoneal site (4%; 95% CI, 3-6%). In the univariate analysis, positive posterior margin (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.17-1.91; p = 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75; p = 0.017) were associated with surgical bed recurrence, and in the multivariate analysis, positive posterior margin remained significant (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.09-1.81; p = 0.009). An isolated local recurrence was found in 197 patients, and a positive posterior margin was associated with surgical bed recurrence in this subgroup (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.10; p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the primary association between site of margin positivity and site of local recurrence was between the posterior margin and surgical bed recurrence. Given this association and the limited ability to modify this margin intraoperatively, preoperative assessment should be emphasized.

Perioperative Transfusions for Gastroesophageal Cancers: Risk Factors and Short- and Long-Term Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Perioperative blood transfusions have been associated with increased morbidity and poorer oncologic outcomes for numerous surgical procedures. However, this issue is understudied among patients with gastroesophageal malignancies. The objective was to clarify the risk factors and impact of perioperative transfusions on quality of life and surgical and oncologic outcomes among patients undergoing gastric and esophageal cancer surgery.

METHODS

Patients undergoing curative-intent resections for gastroesophageal cancers between 2010 and 2018 were included. Perioperative blood transfusion was defined as any transfusion within 24 h pre-operatively, during surgery, or the primary post-operative hospitalization period. Patient and tumor characteristics, surgical and oncological outcomes, and quality of life were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 435 patients were included. Perioperative transfusions occurred in 184 (42%). Anemia, blood loss, female sex, open surgical approach, and operative time emerged as independent risk factors for transfusions. Factors found to be independently associated with overall survival were neoadjuvant therapy, tumor size and stage, major complications, and mortality. Transfusions did not independently impact overall survival, disease-free survival, or quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative transfusions did not impact oncologic outcomes or quality of life among patients undergoing curative-intent surgery for gastroesophageal cancers.

Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation With and Without Systemic Chemotherapy in Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Introduction: Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly being used for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma. While there is evidence supporting neoadjuvant systemic chemotherapy as well as chemoradiation, more evidence is needed to determine whether systemic chemotherapy with chemoradiation offers benefits over chemoradiation alone. This study compares the outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy with and without systemic chemotherapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancers.

Methods: This retrospective study evaluated patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma who completed neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy with and without systemic chemotherapy prior to surgical resection. 149 patients met inclusion criteria, with 75 having resectable cancer and 74 having borderline resectable cancer. Outcomes included recurrence free and overall survival rates at 6, 12, and 36 months.

Results: In resectable pancreatic carcinoma, 72% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone achieved 1 year recurrence free survival compared to 78% of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation (p = 0.55). 28% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone had 3 years recurrence free survival compared to 31% of patients who received systemic and chemoradiation therapy (p = 0.75). In both treatment groups, 92% of patients lived past 1 year (p = 0.92), and 44% of patients survived at least 3 years (p = 0.95). In borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma, 50% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone achieved 1 year recurrence free survival compared to 70% of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation (p = 0.079). The 3 years recurrence free survival was 26 and 29% for the chemoradiation alone group and the systemic chemotherapy plus chemoradiation group, respectively (p = 0.85). There was no significant difference in 1 year overall survival: 85% of patients treated with chemoradiation alone survived compared to 92% of patients treated with systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation (p = 0.32). Both groups had 41% 3 years overall survival (p = 0.96).

Discussion: In resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, there was no significant difference in overall or recurrence free survival between patients treated with chemoradiation with and without systemic chemotherapy. Our findings suggest that systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy with chemoradiation and chemoradiation alone are efficacious treatments for localized pancreatic carcinoma. This brings into question whether more effective systemic chemotherapy is necessary to increase survival benefit.

Recurrence Patterns for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma after Upfront Resection Versus Resection Following Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) represents a paradigm shift in the management of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with perceived benefits including a higher R0 rate. However, it is unclear whether NAT affects the sites and patterns of recurrence after surgery. This review seeks to compare sites and patterns of recurrence after resection between patients undergoing upfront surgery (US) or after NAT. Methods: The EMBASE, SCOPUS, PubMed, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched to identify eligible studies that compare recurrence patterns between patients who had NAT (followed by resection) with those that had US. The primary outcome included site-specific recurrence. Results: 26 articles were identified including 4986 patients who underwent resection. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC, 47% 1074/2264) was the most common, followed by resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC 42%, 949/2264). The weighted overall recurrence rates were lower among the NAT group, 63.4% vs. 74% (US) (OR 0.67 (CI 0.52–0.87), p = 0.006). The overall weighted locoregional recurrence rate was lower amongst patients who received NAT when compared to US (12% vs. 27% OR 0.39 (CI 0.22–0.70), p = 0.004). In BRPC, locoregional recurrence rates improved with NAT (NAT 25.8% US 37.7% OR 0.62 (CI 0.44–0.87), p = 0.007). NAT was associated with a lower weighted liver recurrence rate (NAT 19.4% US 30.1% OR 0.55 (CI 0.34–0.89), p = 0.023). Lung and peritoneal recurrence rates did not differ between NAT and US cohorts (p = 0.705 and p = 0.549 respectively). NAT was associated with a significantly longer weighted mean time to first recurrence 18.8 months compared to US (15.7 months) (OR 0.18 (CI 0.05–0.32), p = 0.015). Conclusion: NAT was associated with lower overall recurrence rate and improved locoregional disease control particularly for those with BRPC. Although the burden of liver metastases was less, there was no overall effect upon distant metastatic disease.

Covered and uncovered biliary metal stents provide similar relief of biliary obstruction during neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Preoperative biliary drainage with self-expanding metal stents (SEMSs) brings liver function within an acceptable range in preparation for neoadjuvant therapy (NATx) and provides relief of obstructive symptoms in patients with pancreatic cancer. We compared fully-covered SEMSs (FCSEMSs) and uncovered SEMSs (UCSEMSs) for sustained biliary drainage before and during NATx.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic cancer and planned NATx who need treatment of jaundice and/or cholestasis before pancreaticoduodenectomy were randomized to FCSEMSs versus UCSEMSs. The primary endpoint was sustained biliary drainage, defined as the absence of reinterventions for biliary obstructive symptoms, and was assessed from SEMS placement until curative intent surgery or at 1 year.

RESULTS

The intention-to-treat population included 119 patients (59 FCSEMSs, 60 UCSEMSs). Sustained biliary drainage was equally successful with FCSEMSs and UCSEMSs (72.2% vs 72.9%, noninferiority P = .01). Reasons for FCSEMS and UCSEMS failure differed significantly between the groups and included tumor ingrowth in 0% versus 16.7% (P < .01), and stent migration in 6.8% versus 0% (P = .03), respectively. Serious adverse event rates related to stent placement were not significantly different in both groups (23.7% [14/59] vs 20.0% [12/60], P = .66), as were acute cholecystitis rates when the gallbladder was in situ (9.3% [4/43] vs 4.8% [2/42], P = .68) for FCSEMSs and UCSEMSs, respectively. In our study, independent of stent type, predictors of reinterventions were 4-cm stent length and presence of the gallbladder.

CONCLUSION

FCSEMSs and UCSEMSs provide similar preoperative management of biliary obstruction in patients with pancreatic cancer receiving NATx, but mechanisms of stent dysfunction depend on stent type, stent length, and presence of the gallbladder. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02238847.).

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.

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.

Neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgical resection for previously explored pancreatic cancer patients is associated with improved survival

BACKGROUND

Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are frequently referred to tertiary centers after unsuccessful attempted resections at other institutions. The outcome of these patients who are ultimately resected is not well understood.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with PDAC who underwent re-exploration between 1995 and 2013 at a single high volume tertiary care institution. We aimed to evaluate the association of neoadjuvant therapy prior to re-exploration on pathologic findings and clinical outcome in previously explored patients with PDAC.

RESULTS

Between 1995 and 2013, 50 of the 2,062 patients who were surgically explored underwent pancreatic resection following a previous exploration where they were deemed unresectable. The most common reason for unresectability at initial operation was vascular invasion (80%) and a presumed R2 resection. Thirty-seven (74%) patients received neoadjuvant therapy. Neoadjuvant therapy was associated with improved TNM stage (P=0.002), fewer positive lymph nodes (0 vs. 2, P=0.025), and improved median survival (24 vs. 13 months, P=0.044). Compared to R2 resected patients with PDAC who had not previously been explored, re-explored patients had significantly lower pathologic T and N stages (P<0.001) and a longer median survival (19 vs. 10 months, P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with PDAC deemed unresectable may warrant re-exploration. Treatment with neoadjuvant therapy between operations is associated with improved pathological stage and survival. In this highly selected group of patients, successful resection is associated with improved survival compared to R2 resections.

Integration of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy into the Multidisciplinary Management of Pancreatic Cancer

Although most patients with pancreatic cancer die of metastatic disease, an autopsy study showed that up to one-third of patients die of predominantly local disease. This patient population stands to benefit the most from radiation, surgery, or both. Unfortunately, however, single-agent chemotherapy has had minimal benefit in pancreatic cancer, and most patients progress distantly before receiving radiation therapy (RT). With the addition of multiagent chemotherapy, patients are living longer, and RT has emerged as an important modality in preventing local progression. Standard chemoradiation delivered over 5-6 weeks has been shown to improve local control, but this approach delays full-dose systemic therapy and increases toxicity when compared to chemotherapy alone. Stereotactic body RT (SBRT) delivered in 3-5 fractions can be used to accurately target the pancreatic tumor with small margins and limited acute treatment-related toxicity. Given the favorable toxicity profile, SBRT can easily be integrated with other therapies in all stages of pancreatic cancer. However, future studies are necessary to determine optimal dose or fractionation regimens and sequencing with targeted therapies and immunotherapy. The purpose of this review is to discuss our current understanding of SBRT in the multidisciplinary management of patients with pancreatic cancer and future implications.

A phase-I trial of pre-operative, margin intensive, stereotactic body radiation therapy for pancreatic cancer: the 'SPARC' trial protocol

BACKGROUND

Standard therapy for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer in the UK is surgery with adjuvant chemotherapy, but rates of resection with clear margins are unsatisfactory and overall survival remains poor. Meta-analysis of single-arm studies shows the potential of neo-adjuvant chemo-radiotherapy but the relative radio-resistance of pancreatic cancer means the efficacy of conventional dose schedules is limited. Stereotactic radiotherapy achieves sufficient accuracy and precision to enable pre-operative margin-intensive dose escalation with the goal of increasing rates of clear resection margins and local disease control.

METHODS/DESIGN

SPARC is a "rolling-six" design single-arm study to establish the maximum tolerated dose for margin-intensive stereotactic radiotherapy before resection of pancreatic cancer at high risk of positive resection margins. Eligible patients will have histologically or cytologically proven pancreatic cancer defined as borderline-resectable per National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria or operable tumour in contact with vessels increasing the risk of positive margin. Up to 24 patients will be recruited from up to 5 treating centres and a 'rolling-six' design is utilised to minimise delays and facilitate ongoing recruitment during dose-escalation. Radiotherapy will be delivered in 5 daily fractions and surgery, if appropriate, will take place 5-6 weeks after radiotherapy. The margin-intense radiotherapy concept includes a systematic method to define the target volume for a simultaneous integrated boost in the region of tumour-vessel infiltration, and up to 4 radiotherapy dose levels will be investigated. Maximum tolerated dose is defined as the highest dose at which no more than 1 of 6 patients or 0 of 3 patients experience a dose limiting toxicity. Secondary endpoints include resection rate, resection margin status, response rate, overall survival and progression free survival at 12 and 24 months. Translational work will involve exploratory analyses of the cytological and humoral immunological responses to stereotactic radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer. Radiotherapy quality assurance of target definition and radiotherapy planning is enforced with pre-trial test cases and on-trial review. Recruitment began in April 2015.

DISCUSSION

This prospective multi-centre study aims to establish the maximum tolerated dose of pre-operative margin-intensified stereotactic radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer at high risk of positive resection margins with a view to subsequent definitive comparison with other neoadjuvant treatment options.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN14138956 . Funded by CRUK.

Stromal Palladin Expression Is an Independent Prognostic Factor in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

It has been clear that cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) in the tumor microenvironment play an important role in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) progression. However, how CAFs relate to the patients' prognosis and the effects of chemoradiation therapy (CRT) has not been fully investigated. Tissue microarrays (TMAs) representing 167 resected PDACs without preoperative treatment were used for immunohistochemical studies (IHC) of palladin, α-smooth muscle actin (SMA), and podoplanin. Correlations between the expression levels of these markers and clinicopathological findings were analyzed statistically. Whole sections of surgical specimens from PDACs with and without preoperative CRT, designated as the chemotherapy-first group (CF, n = 19) and the surgery-first group (SF, n = 21), respectively, were also analyzed by IHC. In TMAs, the disease-specific survival rate (DSS) at 5 years for all 167 cases was 23.1%. Seventy cases (41.9%) were positive for palladin and had significantly lower DSS (p = 0.0430). α-SMA and podoplanin were positive in 167 cases (100%) and 131 cases (78.4%), respectively, and they were not significantly associated with DSS. On multivariable analysis, palladin expression was an independent poor prognostic factor (p = 0.0243, risk ratio 1.60). In the whole section study, palladin positivity was significantly lower (p = 0.0037) in the CF group (5/19) with a significantly better DSS (p = 0.0144) than in the SF group (16/22), suggesting that stromal palladin expression is a surrogate indicator of the treatment effect after chemoradiation therapy.

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.

Improving Survival of Pancreatic Cancer. What Have We Learnt?

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma still ranks high among cancer-related deaths worldwide. In spite of substantial strides in preoperative staging, surgery, perioperative care, and adjuvant treatment, the survival still remains dismal. A number of patient-, disease-, and surgeon-related factors play a role in deciding the eventual outcome of the patient. The aim of this commentary is to review the current knowledge of various factors and the recent advances that impact the survival of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma. A search of scientific literature using Embase and MEDLINE, for the years 1985-2015, was carried out for search terms "pancreatic cancer" and "survival." Further search was based on the various specific prognostic factors that contribute towards survival of patients with pancreatic cancer found in the literature. Most of the studies used for this review include those that deal with pancreatic head cancers, some include patients with pancreatic cancers in all locations while very few included patients with tumors of body and tail only. In spite of significant developments in pre- and perioperative management, increased rates of margin-negative resections, and use of adjuvant treatment, the survival rates of pancreatic cancer patients remains poor. A paradigm shift with more effective adjuvant regimen and genetic interventions may help change the outcomes of patients with pancreatic cancer.

The Role of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy in Patients With Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer With Isolated Venous Vascular Involvement

The rationale for neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (Neo-CRT) and the definition of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) are still controversial. In particular, surgical treatment of BRPC with isolated venous vascular involvement (IVVI) is debatable.From January 2000 to December 2013, 84 patients diagnosed with BRPC according to NCCN guidelines were identified, and 70 patients were found to have BRPC with IVVI. We divided all 70 patients into 3 groups: surgery first without Neo-CRT (Group 1); pancreatectomy following Neo-CRT (Group 2); and no operation following Neo-CRT (Group 3). Patient characteristics including oncologic outcomes were analyzed for each of the 3 patients groups.Thirty-seven patients were female and 33 were male, with a mean age of 61.7 ± 9.74 years. Among the 70 BRPC patients with IVVI, 28 patients (40%) belonged to Group 1, 30 patients (42.9%) belonged to Group 2, and 12 patients (17.1%) belonged to Group 3. Pathological tumor size (P < 0.001), pT stage (P = 0.001), pTNM stage (P=0.002), combined vascular resection (P = 0.003), completeness of adjuvant therapy (P = 0.004) were found to be statistically significantly different between Groups 1 and 2. In addition, disease-free survival (P = 0.055) and disease-specific survival (DSS) (P=0.006) were improved in Group 2. Interestingly, when comparing DSS, there was no statistically significant difference between Groups 1 and 3 (P = 0.991).The clinical practice of pancreatectomy following Neo-CRT in BRPC with IVVI provided favorable oncologic outcomes. The effect of Neo-CRT in BRPC with IVVI may be multifactorial, providing proper patient selection, complete adjuvant chemotherapy, and potential therapeutic (downstaging) effect.

Neoadjuvant therapy for non-metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Treatment of pancreatic cancer is increasingly multimodal, with patients receiving chemotherapy, radiation, and surgical extirpation in hope of long-term cure. There is ongoing debate over the timing, sequence, and necessity of these treatments as they pertain to the spectrum of local-regional disease. Current guidelines support a neoadjuvant strategy in patients with locally advanced and borderline resectable disease. Although there is currently no high-level evidence to recommend neoadjuvant therapy for all patients, there are data to suggest that wider application of neoadjuvant therapy may be beneficial. Random-assignment prospective trials are ongoing. In this review we examine the literature addressing a neoadjuvant approach to potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer and highlight the outcomes of preoperative emergence of latent metastatic disease, attempted resection rates, margin negative resection rates, and pathologic response to treatment.

Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreas cancer: Past lessons and future therapies

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains a most deadly malignancy, with an overall 5-year survival of 5%. A subset of patients will be diagnosed with potentially resectable disease, and while complete surgical resection provides the only chance at cure, data from trials of postoperative chemoradiation and/or chemotherapy demonstrate a modest survival advantage over those patients who undergo resection alone. As such, most practitioners believe that completion of multimodality therapy is the optimal treatment. However, the sequence of surgery, chemotherapy and radiation therapy is frequently debated, as patients may benefit from a neoadjuvant approach by initiating chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation prior to resection. Here we review the rationale for neoadjuvant therapy, which includes a higher rate of completion of multimodality therapy, minimizing the risk of unnecessary surgical resection for patients who develop early metastatic disease, improved surgical outcomes and the potential for longer overall survival. However, there are no prospective, randomized studies of the neoadjuvant approach compared to a surgery-first strategy; the established and ongoing investigations of neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer are discussed in detail. Lastly, as the future of therapeutic regimens is likely to entail patient-specific genetic and molecular analyses, and the treatment that is best applied based on those data, a review of clinically relevant biomarkers in pancreatic cancer is also presented.

Role of neoadjuvant therapy in the management of pancreatic cancer: is the era of biomarker-directed therapy here?

Pancreatic cancer is the 4th leading cause of cancer-related death. Complete surgical resection (CR0) is considered the only curative treatment. Most patients present with unresectable or borderline resectable disease. Many small phase i/ii trials have tried to address the role of neoadjuvant treatment using chemotherapy with or without chemoradiation in the management of locally advanced disease. However, many of them looked at the rate of CR0 resection and the feasibility of such treatment. A trend for improved overall survival has been observed in the group of patients with borderline resectable disease who completed neoadjuvant treatment. A large proportion of patients progress while on treatment, sparing them from unnecessary surgery. We searched the PubMed database (using the key words "pancreatic cancer," or "pancreatic neoplasm," or "pancreatic adenocarcinoma," and "neoadjuvant treatment," or "neoadjuvant chemotherapy," or "neoadjuvant radiation therapy," or "neoadjuvant chemo-radiation," or "adjuvant therapy" [all fields] and "clinical trial" or "study") and abstracts presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology meetings on gastrointestinal cancers. Here, we review the most recent papers that present results on neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer. All but one report used overall survival as an endpoint. Unfortunately, there are no valid biomarkers predicting tumour progression or recurrence, and response to treatment than can help to guide therapeutic choices. Our recommendation is to consider neoadjuvant treatment in cases of borderline resectable disease. In patients with primary resectable tumours, surgery followed by adjuvant treatment and enrollment on adjuvant treatment studies would be appropriate.

Treatment of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma represents a subset of localized cancers that are at high risk for a margin-positive resection and early treatment failure when resected de novo. Although several different anatomic definitions for this disease stage exist, there is agreement that some degree of reconstructible mesenteric vessel involvement by the tumor is the critical anatomic feature that positions borderline resectable between anatomically resectable and unresectable (locally advanced) tumors in the spectrum of localized disease. Consensus also exists that such cancers should be treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation before resection; although the optimal algorithm is unknown, systemic chemotherapy followed by chemoradiation is a rational approach. Although gemcitabine-based systemic chemotherapy with either 5-FU or gemcitabine-based chemoradiation regimens has been used to date, newer regimens, including FOLFIRINOX, should be evaluated on protocol. Delivery of neoadjuvant therapy necessitates durable biliary decompression for as many as 6 months in many patients with cancers of the pancreatic head. Patients with no evidence of metastatic disease following neoadjuvant therapy should be brought to the operating room for pancreatectomy, at which time resection of the superior mesenteric/portal vein and/or hepatic artery should be performed when necessary to achieve a margin-negative resection. Following completion of multimodality therapy, patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer can expect a duration of survival as favorable as that of patients who initially present with resectable tumors. Coordination among a multidisciplinary team of physicians is necessary to maximize these complex patients' short- and long-term oncologic outcomes.

Adverse tumor biology associated with mesenterico-portal vein resection influences survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Although pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with mesenterico-portal vein resection (VR) can be performed safely in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), the impact of this approach on long-term survival is controversial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Analyses of a prospectively collected database revealed 122 consecutive patients with PDAC who underwent PD with (PD+VR) or without (PD-VR) VR between January 2004 and May 2012. Clinical data, operative results, and survival outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Sixty-four (53 %) patients underwent PD+VR. The majority (84 %) of the venous reconstructions were performed with a primary end-to-end anastomosis. Demographic and postoperative outcomes were similar between the two groups. American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, duration of operation, intraoperative blood loss, and blood transfusion requirement were significantly greater in the PD+VR group compared with the PD-VR group. Furthermore, the tumor size was larger, and the rates of periuncinate neural invasion and positive resection margin were higher in the PD+VR group compared with the PD-VR group. Histological venous involvement occurred in 47 of 62 (76 %) patients in the PD+VR group. At a median follow-up of 29 months, the median overall survival (OS) was 18 months for the PD+VR group, and 31 months for the PD-VR group (p = 0.016). ASA score, lymph node metastasis, neurovascular invasion, and tumor differentiation were predictive of survival. The need for VR in itself was not prognostic of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

PD with VR has similar morbidity but worse OS compared with a PD-VR. Although VR is not predictive of survival, tumors requiring a PD+VR have more adverse biological features.

Impact of preoperative therapy on patterns of recurrence in pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

A theoretical advantage of preoperative therapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma is that it facilitates the early treatment of micrometastases and reduces postoperative systemic recurrence.

METHODS

Medical records of 309 consecutive patients undergoing resection of adenocarcinoma in the head of the pancreas were reviewed. Survival was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Associations between preoperative therapy and patterns of recurrence were determined using chi-squared analysis.

RESULTS

Preoperative therapy was administered to 108 patients and upfront surgery was performed in 201 patients. Preoperative therapy was associated with a significantly longer median disease-free survival of 14 months compared with 12 months in patients submitted to upfront surgery (P = 0.035). The rate of local disease as a component of first site of recurrence was significantly lower with preoperative therapy (11.3%) than with upfront surgery (22.9%) (P = 0.016). Preoperative therapy was associated with a lower rate of hepatic metastasis (21.7%) than upfront surgery (34.3%) (P = 0.026). Preoperative therapy did not affect rates of peritoneal or pulmonary metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative therapy for pancreatic cancer was associated with longer disease-free survival and lower rates of local and hepatic recurrences. These data support the use of preoperative therapy to reduce systemic and local failures after resection.

Splenic vein thrombosis is associated with an increase in pancreas-specific complications and reduced survival in patients undergoing distal pancreatectomy for pancreatic exocrine cancer

Distal pancreatectomy and splenectomy (DPS) is the procedure of choice for the surgical treatment of pancreatic exocrine cancer localized to the body and tail of the pancreas. Splenic vein thrombosis (SVT) can occur in patients with malignant pancreatic exocrine tumors secondary to direct tumor invasion or compression of the splenic vein by mass effect. This study examines the effect of preoperative SVT on postoperative outcomes. In this retrospective cohort study, we queried our pancreatic surgery database to identify patients who underwent DPS from October 2005 to June 2011. These cases were evaluated for evidence of preoperative SVT on clinical records and cross-sectional imaging (CT,MRI, endoscopic US). Outcomes for patients with and without SVT were compared. From an overall cohort of 285 consecutive patients who underwent DPS during the study period, data were evaluated for 70 subjects who underwent surgery for pancreatic exocrine cancer (27 with SVT, 43 without SVT). The preoperative demographics and co-morbidities were similar between the groups, except the average age was higher for those without SVT (p<0.05). The median estimated blood loss was significantly higher in the SVT group (675 versus 250 ml, p=<0.001).While the overall morbidity rates were similar between the two groups (48 % SVT versus 56% no SVT, p=NS), the group with SVT had a significantly higher rate of pancreas-specific complications, including pancreatic fistula (33 versus 7 %,p<0.01) and delayed gastric emptying (15 versus 0%, p<0.02). Hospital readmission rates were similar between the groups(30 versus 28 %, p=NS). Patients without SVT had a trend toward longer median survival (40 versus 20.8 months),although the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.1). DPS for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma can be performed safely in patients with SVT, but with higher intraoperative blood loss, increased pancreas-specific complications, and a trend towards lower long-term survival rates. This paper was presented as a poster at the 53rd annual meeting of the Society for Surgery of the Alimentary Tract and at the 46th annual meeting of the Pancreas Club, San Diego, CA, May 2012.

Self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) for preoperative biliary decompression in patients with resectable and borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer: outcomes in 241 patients

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Obstructive jaundice caused by distal biliary obstruction can present in up to 70 % of patients with localized cancer of the head of the pancreas. The aim of this study was to report our experience in using self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) for preoperative biliary decompression in patients with resectable and borderline resectable carcinoma of the pancreatic head.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study evaluating patients from two tertiary referral centers. Two-hundred and forty-one patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic carcinoma underwent ERCP with metal biliary stent placement between September 2006 and August 2011. We assessed the effectiveness of SEMS to adequately decompress the biliary tree, procedural success, patient survival, stent patency, and stent-related complications.

RESULTS

Two-hundred and forty-one patients were evaluated [123 male, mean age (± SD) 67.4 ± 9.8 years; resectable 174, borderline resectable 67]. Patients with borderline-resectable cancer underwent neoadjuvant therapy and restaging before possible curative surgery. Successful placement of a metal biliary stent was achieved in all patients and improved jaundice. Patients were followed for mean duration of 6.3 months. The overall survival was 49 % at 27 months. Fourteen (5.8 %) patients experienced stent occlusion; the mean time to stent occlusion was 6.6 (range 1-20) months. Immediate complications included: post-ERCP pancreatitis (n = 14), stent migration (n = 3), and duodenal perforation (n = 3). Long-term complications included stent migration (n = 9) and hepatic abscess (n = 1). A total of 144/174 patients deemed to have resectable cancer at time of diagnosis underwent curative surgery. Due to disease progression or the discovery of metastasis after neoadjuvant therapy, only 22/67 patients with borderline-resectable cancer underwent curative surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

SEMS should be considered for patients with obstructive jaundice and resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, especially if surgery is not planned immediately as a result of preoperative chemoradiation. These stents appear to be safe and effective.

Controversial issues of neoadjuvant treatment in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is known as one of the most fatal malignant diseases in gastrointestinal system. Approximately 20% of patients are deemed resectable at the time of diagnosis. Preoperative neoadjuvant therapy to the borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) has been challenged to achieve down-staging of cancer, to avoid unnecessary major operation if the pancreatic cancer progresses and distant metastasis develops during preoperative treatment, and to avoid delayed adjuvant treatment after major operation due to postoperative complications and poor general condition after major surgery. However, there are some controversial issues influencing the clinical interpretation of surgical and oncologic outcomes of pancreatectomy following neoadjuvant treatment in managing BRPC. This manuscript reviews the current controversial issues in managing BRPC in order to enhance proper understanding the current status and potential role of neoadjuvant treatment in managing BRPC.

Neoadjuvant cetuximab, twice-weekly gemcitabine, and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy has been investigated for localized and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) but no standard of care exists. Combination cetuximab/gemcitabine/radiotherapy demonstrates encouraging preclinical activity in PDAC. We investigated cetuximab with twice-weekly gemcitabine and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) as neoadjuvant therapy in patients with localized or locally advanced PDAC.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Treatment consisted of cetuximab load at 400 mg/m(2) followed by cetuximab 250 mg/m(2) weekly and gemcitabine 50 mg/m(2) twice-weekly given concurrently with IMRT to 54 Gy. Following therapy, patients were considered for resection.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were enrolled with 33 assessable for response. Ten patients (30%) manifested partial response and 20 (61%) manifested stable disease by RECIST. Twenty-five patients (76%) underwent resection, including 18/23 previously borderline and 3/6 previously unresectable tumors. Twenty-three (92%) of these had negative surgical margins. Pathology revealed that 24% of resected tumors had grade III/IV tumor kill, including two pathological complete responses (8%). Median survival was 24.3 months in resected patients. Outcome did not vary by epidermal growth factor receptor status.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant therapy with cetuximab/gemcitabine/IMRT is tolerable and active in PDAC. Margin-negative resection rates are high and some locally advanced tumors can be downstaged to allow for complete resection with encouraging survival. Pathological complete responses can occur. This combination warrants further investigation.

Defined clinical classifications are associated with outcome of patients with anatomically resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

We previously introduced a classification system for patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma that integrates assessments of tumor anatomy, cancer biology, and patient physiology. By means of this system, we sought to analyze outcomes of patients with resectable anatomy but heterogeneous biology and physiology who were treated with neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

We evaluated consecutive patients (2002-2007) with anatomically potentially resectable cancers treated with chemotherapy or chemoradiation before potential pancreatectomy. We compared clinical factors and outcomes of patients classified as having disease that was clinically resectable (CR; no extrapancreatic disease, preserved performance status); suspicion for extrapancreatic disease (BR-B); or marginal performance status or significant comorbidity (BR-C). Patients with borderline resectable anatomy (BR-A) were excluded.

RESULTS

Resection rates for 138 CR, 41 BR-B, and 38 BR-C patients were 75, 46, and 37%, respectively (P < 0.001). Metastases, detected during treatment in 23% of patients, were the most common contraindication to resection among CR (15%) and BR-B (46%) patients. Performance status rarely precluded surgery except among BR-C (32%) patients. Factors associated with selection against surgery were older age, poor performance status, pain, and therapeutic complications (P < 0.05). The median overall survival of all patients was 21 months. Resected and unresected BR-B and BR-C patients had median overall survival durations similar to those of resected and unresected CR patients, respectively (P > 0.22).

CONCLUSIONS

This system describes discrete clinical subgroups of patients with pancreatic cancer who have similar, potentially resectable tumor anatomy but heterogeneous physiology and cancer biology. It may be used with neoadjuvant therapy to predict outcomes, individualize treatment algorithms, and optimize survival.

Pancreatoduodenectomy following neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy in uncinate process pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

The objective of the study was to delineate surgical outcomes of pancreatoduodenectomy following neoadjuvant concurrent chemoradiation therapy (CCRT) in uncinate process pancreatic cancer (UPC).

METHODS

We reviewed 97 patients with resected usual pancreatic head cancer (PHC) and UPC and analyzed clinicopathologic characteristics and survival outcomes of PHC and UPC with a review of the reported literature regarding UPC.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (27.8%) had UPC, and 72 patients had PHC. Pylorus-preserving pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 67 patients (69.1%) and conventional pancreatoduodenectomy in 28 patients (28.9%), and 2 patients needed total pancreatectomies. When comparing UPCs with PHCs, less frequent jaundice (P = 0.009) and more advanced stages of cancers at the time of diagnosis (linear-to-linear association, P = 0.03) were found in UPCs, and CCRT was administered more frequently in UPCs (P = 0.013). Survival outcomes between PHC and UPC were similar, with median survival rates of 25.9 and 30.5 months, respectively (P = 0.702). In addition, disease-free survival was similar between the 2 groups (15.6 and 15.2 months, respectively; P = 0.4503). Our oncologic outcome of pancreatectomy for UPC is likely to be more acceptable compared with those previously reported in the literature.

CONCLUSIONS

Although UPCs are found in relatively advanced clinical stages, favorable oncologic outcomes may be obtained by pancreatectomy following preoperative CCRT.

Self-expanding metal stents for biliary drainage in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: single-center experience with 79 cases

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To study pre-operative and peri-operative course and outcome on follow up after pancreaticoduodenenctomy (PD) for resectable pancreatic cancer amongst patients receiving self-expanding metal stents (SEMS).

METHODS

Medical charts of consecutively reviewed patients (2005-2009) with resectable pancreatic cancer and SEMS placement before PD at the MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) were studied.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients (mean age, 68 ± 9 years; 54% males) undergoing PD after SEMS placement were analyzed. Of these, 70% (55/79) had come with previous plastic stents placed within a median of 29 (5-216) days because of presentation and most (95%) underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiation after SEMS placement. The median interval between SEMS placement and PD was 120 (range 28-306) days. There were no technical difficulties during PD. The resected tumor was stage T3 in 72 patients, positive node in 44, lymphovascular invasion in 47, and perineural invasion in 62. Within 30 days after surgery, 26 (33%) patients developed complications requiring intervention, but none died. During a median follow-up of 349 (14-1,508) days after surgery, 32 (41%) patients developed metastatic disease, and 20 (25%) died; median survival was approximately 3 years. Development of metastatic disease during follow-up independently predicted survival with hazard ratio of 16 (95% CI: 4-68; P = 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Contrary to the tendency of avoiding the use of metal stents for biliary decompression amongst patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, our study demonstrated that SEMS did not adversely affect surgical technique, postoperative course, or long-term outcome. Therefore, metal stents should be considered for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who will undergo preoperative chemoradiation.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and surgical outcomes following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to characterize the surgically important benefits and complications associated with the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of both resectable and initially unresectable pancreatic cancer. Studies were identified through a systematic literature search and analyzed by two independent reviewers. Survival, peri-operative complications, death rate, pancreatic fistula rate, and the incidence of involved surgical margins were analyzed and subject to meta-analysis.

METHODS

Nineteen studies, involving 2,148 patients were identified. Only cohort studies were included.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis found that patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy achieved similar survival outcomes to patients with resectable disease, even though only 40% were ultimately resected. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was not associated with a statistically significant increase in the rate of pancreatic fistula formation or total complications.

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were less likely to have a positive resection margin, although there was an increase in the risk of peri-operative death.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of survival and surgical outcomes following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to characterize the surgically important benefits and complications associated with the use of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of both resectable and initially unresectable pancreatic cancer. Studies were identified through a systematic literature search and analyzed by two independent reviewers. Survival, peri-operative complications, death rate, pancreatic fistula rate, and the incidence of involved surgical margins were analyzed and subject to meta-analysis.

METHODS

Nineteen studies, involving 2,148 patients were identified. Only cohort studies were included.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis found that patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer who underwent neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy achieved similar survival outcomes to patients with resectable disease, even though only 40% were ultimately resected. Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy was not associated with a statistically significant increase in the rate of pancreatic fistula formation or total complications.

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy were less likely to have a positive resection margin, although there was an increase in the risk of peri-operative death.

The association of quality-of-life measures with malignancy and survival in patients with pancreatic pathology

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed whether pretreatment quality-of-life (QoL) scores could predict the presence of pancreatic malignancy and survival.

METHODS

Patients with pancreatic lesions completed the SF-36, containing 8 domains: physical functioning, role-physical, role-emotional, bodily pain, vitality, mental health, social functioning, and general health. Data obtained included age, sex, resectability, additional antineoplastic therapy, stage, pathology, and survival. Patients were categorized by pathology (benign vs malignant), stage (local, regional, or distant), resectability (resected vs not), survival (<1 vs >1 year), and their pretreatment QoL scores.

RESULTS

Of the 323 patients assessed, 210 had malignancies. In 6 of the 8 domains, patients with malignancies had lower median QoL scores compared with patients with benign lesions. Of the patients with malignancies, patients surviving at 1 year or less had lower pretreatment scores in all domains. Stage, resection, adjuvant therapy, and vitality score were independent predictors of survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with pancreatic malignancies had lower QoL scores than patients with benign pancreatic disease. Patients with malignancies surviving at 1 year or less had lower scores, even after controlling for stage. This suggests that pretreatment QoL scores are associated with pancreatic malignancy and survival.

A decision model of therapy for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Optimal treatment for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer is controversial. Resection is considered the only curative treatment, but neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy may offer significant advantages.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We developed a decision model for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Initial therapeutic choices were surgery, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, or no treatment; subsequent decisions offered a second intervention if not prohibited by complications or death. Payoffs were calculated as the median expected survival. We gathered evidence for this model through a comprehensive MEDLINE search. One-way sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation is favored over initial surgery, with expected values of 18.6 and 17.7 mo, respectively. The decision is sensitive to the probabilities of treatment mortality and tumor resectability. Threshold probabilities are 7.0% mortality of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, 69.2% resectability on imaging after neoadjuvant therapy, and 73.7% resectability at exploration after neoadjuvant therapy, 92.2% resectability at initial resection, and 9.9% surgical mortality following chemoradiotherapy. The decision is sensitive to the utility of time spent in chemoradiotherapy, with surgery favored for utilities less than 0.3 and -0.8, for uncomplicated and complicated chemoradiotherapy, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The ideal treatment for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial, but recent evidence supports a slight benefit for neoadjuvant therapy. Our model shows that the decision is sensitive to the probability of tumor resectability and chemoradiation mortality, but not to rates of other treatment complications. With minimal benefit of one treatment over another based on survival alone, patient preferences will likely play an important role in determining best treatment.

Effect of initiating a multidisciplinary care clinic on access and time to treatment in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma requires referral to multiple specialists before initiating therapy. We evaluated the effect of establishing a multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) for patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic adenocarcinoma on treatment access and time to therapy.

METHODS

Patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed and treated at our center were included. Two patient groups were defined: preclinic represented those patients diagnosed before 2008 and MDC represented those patients diagnosed since 2009 who were treated in the newly created MDC and were initially candidates for neoadjuvant therapy. The primary outcomes were days from diagnosis to first treatment (initiation of chemotherapy or external beam radiation), days to completion of all required consultations, and number of visits needed before initiation of therapy.

RESULTS

Ninety-seven patients were diagnosed and treated at our medical center from 2003 to 2008; 22 were treated in 2009 after the implementation of the MDC. Compared with the preclinic group, patients treated in the MDC had shorter times from biopsy to treatment (7.7 days v 29.5 days, P < .001), shorter time to completion of all required pretreatment consultations (7.1 days v 13.9 days, P < .001), and fewer visits to complete all consultations (1.1 v 4.3, P < .001). Thirty-three percent of patients seen in the MDC enrolled onto clinical research trials.

CONCLUSION

In patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma undergoing neoadjuvant therapy, the establishment of a multidisciplinary pancreas tumor clinic led to improved patient access to consultations and shorter time to initial treatment.

Local recurrence of pancreatic cancer after primary surgical intervention: how to deal with this devastating scenario?

The dismal prognosis of pancreatic cancer reflects into the increased recurrence rate, even after R0 pancreaticoduodenectomy. Although, conventional radiation-, chemo- or surgical therapy in much selected cases, seem to work out favorably long term, less invasive and non-toxic methods with more immediate results are always preferred, concerning the already aggravated status of this group of patients. We present hereby a comprehensive review of the literature concerning the treatment of recurrent pancreatic cancer based on the case of a patient who 20 months after a pancreaticoduodenectomy developed portal hypertension and symptomatic first degree esophageal, gastric and mesenteric varices, caused by the nearly complete splenic vein obstruction at the portal vein confluence. The varices were revascularized by a percutaneous transhepatic placement of an endovascular stent into the splenic vein, along with a sequent stereotactic body radiation therapy for the local tumor control. Thanks to the accuracy and safety of the present combined treatment, the patient one year later presents control of the disease and its complications. Our paper is the first in the international literature that tries to review all the treatment modalities available (surgical, adjuvant, neoadjuvant and palliative therapy) and their efficacy, concerning the locally recurrent pancreatic cancer; furthermore, we tried to analyze the application of the above mentioned combined therapeutic approach in similar cases, elucidating simultaneously all the questions that arise. The limited existing data in the international literature and the lack of randomized controlled trials make this effort difficult, but the physician should be aware after all of all the available and innovative treatment modalities, before he chooses one. Finally, we would like to emphasize the fact that not only the local control but also the management of the complications are important for a prolonged median survival and a better quality of life after all.

Neoadjuvant therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer: a disappointing therapeutic approach?

Pancreatic cancer is a devastating disease. It is the fourth leading cause of cancer-related death in Germany. The incidence in 2003/2004 was 16 cases per 100.000 inhabitants. Of all carcinomas, pancreatic cancer has the highest mortality rate, with one- and five-year survival rates of 25% and less than 5%, respectively, regardless of the stage at diagnosis. These low survival rates demonstrate the poor prognosis of this carcinoma. Previous therapeutic approaches including surgical resection combined with adjuvant therapy or palliative chemoradiation have not achieved satisfactory results with respect to overall survival. Therefore, it is necessary to evaluate new therapeutic approaches. Neoadjuvant therapy is an interesting therapeutic option for patients with pancreatic cancer. For selected patients with borderline or unresectable disease, neoadjuvant therapy offers the potential for tumor downstaging, increasing the probability of a margin-negative resection and decreasing the occurrence of lymph node metastasis. Currently, there is no universally accepted approach for treating patients with pancreatic cancer in the neoadjuvant setting. In this review, the most common neoadjuvant strategies will be described, compared and discussed.

Current status of adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer

In this article, we review the rationale for and outcomes associated with the use of adjuvant and neoadjuvant therapy for resectable and borderline resectable cancer of the pancreatic head and uncinate process. Localized pancreatic cancer is a systemic disease that requires nonoperative therapies to minimize the local and systemic recurrences that almost invariably occur in the absence of such therapy, even following complete surgical resection. A well-defined role exists for the systemic administration of gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil in the postoperative setting. Although the survival benefit associated with adjuvant chemoradiation has not been as rigorously defined, its use is supported by extensive historic experience; chemoradiation should be considered particularly for patients at high risk for local recurrence. Delivery of chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation prior to surgery has multiple potential advantages, although the superiority of neoadjuvant therapy over standard postoperative therapy has yet to be demonstrated. Neoadjuvant therapy may be particularly beneficial among patients with borderline resectable cancers. Although the existing literature is confusing, and indeed controversial, available evidence suggests that systemic chemotherapy and/or chemoradiation should be offered to all patients with pancreatic cancer who undergo potentially curative resection. Well-designed prospective trials are needed to define the optimal adjuvant or neoadjuvant therapy strategy for these patients.

Vascular reconstruction during pancreatoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas improves resectability but does not achieve cure

OBJECTIVE

Combined vascular and pancreatic resection improves long-term survival of patients suffering from ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head. This study was designed to compare the results of surgical resection in patients with pancreatic cancer with or without vascular resection. Late 10-year disease-free survival was considered as an indicator of patients' disease cure.

METHODS

A total of 149 consecutive patients have undergone pancreatoduodenectomy without vascular resection (group 1: 82 patients), with isolated venous resection (group B: 67 patients), or with arterial and/or venous resection (group C: 8 patients).

RESULTS

The duration of surgery and blood losses were significantly more important in groups B and C compared with group A; however, postoperative morbidity and mortality rates were similar. R1 resection was significantly more frequent in groups B (42%) and C (50%) compared with group A (13%; p = 0.0002), but there were more advanced tumors in these groups, as demonstrated by a lower Karnowsky index, higher Ca 19-9 plasmatic level, greater tumor size, more advanced stage in the AJCC classification, and more tumor location in the uncinate process of the pancreas. Ten-year overall and disease-free survivals were significantly better in group A (19 and 20%) compared with group B (2.8 and 0%) and group C (0% and 0%). Multivariate analysis proved vascular resection and metastatic nodal status as being independent predictive factors of disease-free survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Vascular resection combined to pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer increases local resectability without increasing mortality and morbidity rates but does not improve patients' disease cure rate.

Occlusion rate and complications of plastic biliary stent placement in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer with malignant biliary obstruction

GOALS

Determine the stent patency rates, need for additional procedures, and complications of plastic biliary during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy.

BACKGROUND

Malignant biliary obstruction is a common feature of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and palliative plastic biliary stents are often placed during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy before operative resection.

RESULTS

Forty-nine patients with resectable or locally advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma and biliary obstruction had a plastic biliary stent placed endoscopically before receiving neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy. The median time from stent placement to surgery was 150 days (range 71-227 d). Twenty-two patients (45%) had stents that remained patent throughout the course of neoadjuvant therapy. The remaining 27 patients (55%) required repeat ERCP for stent exchange, a median of 82.5 days after original stent placement (range 14-183 d). Fourteen were owing to abnormal liver enzymes or jaundice and 13 were owing to ascending cholangitis. Seventeen of these patients (63%) required hospitalization for either biliary obstruction or cholangitis. The median duration of hospital stay associated with stent exchange was 3 days (range 2-13 d).

CONCLUSIONS

Plastic biliary stents do not maintain patency during the time required for most patients to complete neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Initially placing metallic stents to palliate malignant obstruction may be a safer and more cost-effective strategy.

Update on adjuvant trials for pancreatic cancer

Adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer remains a controversial topic, with a paucity of randomized controlled trials in this area and various limitations in the trials that have been conducted to date, leaving many questions as to a true "standard of care" for patients with resectable or potentially resectable disease. Several large and well-conducted phase 3 trials have reported results recently and have helped to solidify the role of chemotherapy, with either 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine, as an effective intervention in the adjuvant setting. The role of radiotherapy remains unclear, but it does seem to be feasible and safe, and there are trials in development that may shed more light on this question. Many small trials have pointed to the potential utility of neoadjuvant strategies in selecting the patients who are most likely to benefit from surgery and in improving outcomes by providing systemic therapy early on. Larger trials are ongoing in hopes that they will give more definitive answers as to when this strategy should be used. It is hoped that trials using novel agents, either alone or in combination with more traditional therapies, will better define the best strategy for improving outcomes in patients with resectable disease.

Endovascular recanalization of symptomatic portomesenteric venous obstruction after pancreaticoduodenectomy and radiation

Intraoperative radiation therapy (RT) may improve outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary cancer; however, there is a 20% risk of late portomesenteric venous obstruction. This retrospective study evaluated the percutaneous treatment of portomesenteric venous obstruction that occurred a mean of 10 months after pancreaticoduodenectomy and intraoperative RT. Five patients with medically refractory ascites and portomesenteric obstruction on computed tomographic angiography had successful recanalization with elimination of the pressure gradient and no procedural complications. One patient showed no improvement clinically. Recurrent ascites after stent occlusion was successfully treated in two patients. Percutaneous transhepatic recanalization appears to be a safe and effective therapy in this population.

Vitamin D for the prevention and treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is ranked fifth among cancer-related deaths worldwide with a 5-year survival rate of less than 5%. Currently, surgery is the only effective therapy. However, most patients are diagnosed in the late stage and are not suitable for receiving curative surgery. Moreover, pancreatic cancer doesn’t respond well to traditional chemotherapy and radiotherapy, leaving little effective treatment for advanced pancreatic cancer cases. 1α,25-dihydroxyvitamin D₃ [1α,25(OH)₂D₃], the biologically active form of vitamin D₃, was originally identified during studies of calcium and bone metabolism, though it is now recognized that it exerts biological effects in almost every tissue in the body. Abundant evidence has shown that 1α,25(OH)₂D₃ has antiproliferative, apoptotic, pro-differentiation and antiangiogensis effects in many types of cancer cells in vivo and in vitro, including breast, prostate, and colon. Similarly, the antitumor growth effect of 1α,25(OH)₂D₃ on pancreatic cells has been demonstrated. The clinical use of 1α,25(OH)₂D₃ is impeded by the lethal side effects of hypercalcemia and hypercalciuria. Therefore, 1α,25(OH)₂D₃ analogs, which are either equipotent or more potent than 1α,25(OH)₂D₃ in inhibiting tumor cell growth but with fewer hypercalcemic and hypercalciuric side effects, have been developed for the treatment of different cancers. Recently, a pre-clinical study demonstrated that a less calcemic analog of 1α,25(OH)₂D₃, 19-nor-1α,25(OH)₂D₂ (Paricalcitol), is effective in inhibiting tumor growth in vitro and in vivo, via upregulation of p21 and p27 tumor suppressor genes. Studies on the anti-tumor effects of a more potent analog of Paricalcitol are underway. 1α,25(OH)₂D₃ and its analogs are potentially attractive novel therapies for pancreatic cancer.

The pathology and genetics of metastatic pancreatic cancer

CONTEXT

Metastatic disease is the most critical determinant of resectability of pancreatic cancer and accounts for the poor outcome of patients with this disease. Thus, a better understanding of metastatic pancreatic cancer will afford new opportunities for therapeutic intervention.

OBJECTIVE

To summarize and discuss the current understanding of the clinical and molecular features of metastatic pancreatic cancer.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature on advanced stage pancreatic cancer, pancreatic cancer metastasis, and autopsy findings in patients with pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

In the clinical setting, it can be difficult to distinguish a metastatic pancreatic carcinoma from primary neoplasms in the liver, lung, or ovary. However, immunolabeling for DPC4 protein as part of a diagnostic panel is useful for making this distinction. Emerging data from a variety of investigators now indicate that overexpression of EphA2, loss of DPC4 and MKK4, and aberrant activation of the Hedgehog signaling pathway are associated with metastatic propensity of pancreatic cancers, providing novel therapeutic targets for the most lethal stage of this disease.