1
|
Arjani S, Prasath V, Suri N, Li S, Ahlawat S, Chokshi RJ. Neoadjuvant Treatment Versus Upfront Surgery in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. JCO Oncol Pract 2023; 19:e439-e448. [PMID: 36548928 DOI: 10.1200/op.22.00536] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/24/2022] Open
Abstract
PURPOSE Pancreatic cancer (PC) has an overall 5-year survival rate of 10%. The use of neoadjuvant chemoradiation is debated in resectable disease. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of neoadjuvant chemoradiation followed by pancreaticoduodenectomy (NACRT) versus upfront pancreaticoduodenectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy (USR) in resectable PC. METHODS A decision tree model was used to estimate the cost-effectiveness of NACRT versus USR. Values from the published literature populate the tree: costs from Medicare (FY2021) reimbursements, and morbidity and survival data for quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma who qualified for resection were included. The ICER was the primary outcome. The model was validated using one-way and two-way deterministic, as well as probabilistic sensitivity analyses. RESULTS The base case was modeled using a 65-year-old male. NACRT yielded 1.61 QALYs at $45,483.52 USD. USR yielded 1.47 QALYs at a discount of $6,840.96 USD. The ICER was $48,130 USD, which favors NACRT. One-way sensitivity analyses upheld these results except when ≤ 21.0% of NACRT patients proceeded to surgery and when ≤ 85.4% of NACRT patients were resectable at surgery. Two-way sensitivity analyses also favored NACRT except in cases when the proportion of resected disease after NACRT decreased. NACRT was favored in 94.3% of 100,000 random-sampling simulations. CONCLUSION It is more cost-effective to administer NACRT before surgery for patients with resectable PC. On the basis of sensitivity analyses, USR with adjuvant therapy is only favored if rates of resection and eligibility for resection after NACRT decrease. NACRT should be considered in all patients unless there is an absolute contraindication.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Nipun Suri
- Department of Internal Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ
| | - Sharon Li
- Division of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ
| | - Sushil Ahlawat
- Division of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Department of Internal Medicine, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ
| | - Ravi J Chokshi
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Rutgers New Jersey Medical School, Newark, NJ
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Bradley A, Van der Meer R, McKay CJ. A prognostic Bayesian network that makes personalized predictions of poor prognostic outcome post resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0222270. [PMID: 31498836 PMCID: PMC6733484 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0222270] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/12/2019] [Accepted: 08/19/2019] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The narrative surrounding the management of potentially resectable pancreatic cancer is complex. Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment. However resection rates are low, the risk of operative morbidity and mortality are high, and survival outcomes remain poor. The aim of this study was to create a prognostic Bayesian network that pre-operatively makes personalized predictions of post-resection survival time of 12months or less and also performs post-operative prognostic updating. METHODS A Bayesian network was created by synthesizing data from PubMed post-resection survival analysis studies through a two-stage weighting process. Input variables included: inflammatory markers, tumour factors, tumour markers, patient factors and, if applicable, response to neoadjuvant treatment for pre-operative predictions. Prognostic updating was performed by inclusion of post-operative input variables including: pathology results and adjuvant therapy. RESULTS 77 studies (n = 31,214) were used to create the Bayesian network, which was validated against a prospectively maintained tertiary referral centre database (n = 387). For pre-operative predictions an Area Under the Curve (AUC) of 0.7 (P value: 0.001; 95% CI 0.589-0.801) was achieved accepting up to 4 missing data-points in the dataset. For prognostic updating an AUC 0.8 (P value: 0.000; 95% CI:0.710-0.870) was achieved when validated against a dataset with up to 6 missing pre-operative, and 0 missing post-operative data-points. This dropped to AUC: 0.7 (P value: 0.000; 95% CI:0.667-0.818) when the post-operative validation dataset had up to 2 missing data-points. CONCLUSION This Bayesian network is currently unique in the way it utilizes PubMed and patient level data to translate the existing empirical evidence surrounding potentially resectable pancreatic cancer to make personalized prognostic predictions. We believe such a tool is vital in facilitating better shared decision-making in clinical practice and could be further developed to offer a vehicle for delivering personalized precision medicine in the future.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Bradley
- Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
- West of Scotland Pancreatic Cancer Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
- * E-mail:
| | - Robert Van der Meer
- Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
| | - Colin J. McKay
- West of Scotland Pancreatic Cancer Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Personalized Pancreatic Cancer Management: A Systematic Review of How Machine Learning Is Supporting Decision-making. Pancreas 2019; 48:598-604. [PMID: 31090660 DOI: 10.1097/mpa.0000000000001312] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
This review critically analyzes how machine learning is being used to support clinical decision-making in the management of potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines, electronic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane Database were undertaken. Studies were assessed using the checklist for critical appraisal and data extraction for systematic reviews of prediction modeling studies (CHARMS) checklist. In total 89,959 citations were retrieved. Six studies met the inclusion criteria. Three studies were Markov decision-analysis models comparing neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery. Three studies predicted survival time using Bayesian modeling (n = 1) and artificial neural network (n = 1), and one study explored machine learning algorithms including Bayesian network, decision trees, k-nearest neighbor, and artificial neural networks. The main methodological issues identified were limited data sources, which limits generalizability and potentiates bias; lack of external validation; and the need for transparency in methods of internal validation, consecutive sampling, and selection of candidate predictors. The future direction of research relies on expanding our view of the multidisciplinary team to include professionals from computing and data science with algorithms developed in conjunction with clinicians and viewed as aids, not replacement, to traditional clinical decision-making.
Collapse
|
4
|
Upfront Surgery versus Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis. Sci Rep 2019; 9:4354. [PMID: 30867522 PMCID: PMC6416273 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-40951-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 35] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/14/2018] [Accepted: 02/26/2019] [Indexed: 12/15/2022] Open
Abstract
Current treatment recommendations for resectable pancreatic cancer support upfront resection and adjuvant therapy. Randomized controlled trials offering comparison with the emerging neoadjuvant approach are lacking. This review aims to compare both treatment strategies for resectable pancreatic cancer. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database and Cochrane Databases were searched for studies comparing neoadjuvant and surgery-first with adjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias, ROBINS-I and GRADE tools were used to assess quality and risk of bias of included trials. 9 studies compared neoadjuvant therapy and surgery-first with adjuvant therapy (n = 22,285). Aggregate rate (AR) of R0 resection for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.8008 (0.3636–0.9144) versus 0.7515 (0.2026–0.8611) odds ratio (O.R.) 1.27 (95% CI 0.60–1.96). 1-year survival AR for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.7969 (0.6061–0.9500) versus 0.7481 (0.4848–0.8500) O.R. 1.38 (95% CI 0.69–2.96). 2-year survival AR for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.5178 (0.3000–0.5970) versus 0.5131 (0.2727–0.5346) O.R. 1.26 (95% CI 0.94–1.74). 5-year AR survival for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.2069 (0.0323–0.3300) versus 0.1783 (0.0606–0.2300) O.R. 1.19 (95% CI 0.65–1.73). In conclusion neoadjuvant therapy may offer benefit over surgery-first and adjuvant therapy. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed.
Collapse
|
5
|
Bradley A, Van Der Meer R. Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis. PLoS One 2019; 14:e0212805. [PMID: 30817807 PMCID: PMC6394923 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0212805] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/07/2018] [Accepted: 02/09/2019] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Neoadjuvant therapy has emerged as an alternative treatment strategy for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. In the absence of large randomized controlled trials offering a direct comparison, this study aims to use Markov decision analysis to compare efficacy of traditional surgery first (SF) and neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Methods An advanced Markov decision analysis model was constructed to compare SF and NAT pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Transition probabilities were calculated from randomized control and Phase II/III trials after comprehensive literature search. Utility outcomes were measured in overall and quality-adjusted life months (QALMs) on an intention-to-treat basis as the primary outcome. Markov cohort analysis of treatment received was the secondary outcome. Model uncertainties were tested with one and two-way deterministic and probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis. Results SF gave 23.72 months (18.51 QALMs) versus 20.22 months (16.26 QALMs). Markov Cohort Analysis showed that where all treatment modalities were received NAT gave 35.05 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 30.96 months (24.86QALMs) for R0 resection and 34.08 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 25.85 months (20.72 QALMs) for R1 resection. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that NAT was superior if the resection rate was greater than 51.04% or below 75.68% in SF pathway. Two-way sensitivity analysis showed that pathway superiority depended on obtaining multimodal treatment in either pathway. Conclusion Whilst NAT is a viable alternative to traditional SF approach, superior pathway selection depends on the individual patient’s likelihood of receiving multimodal treatment in either pathway.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alison Bradley
- Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
- West of Scotland Pancreatic Cancer Unit, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
- * E-mail:
| | - Robert Van Der Meer
- Department of Management Science, Strathclyde Business School, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland, United Kingdom
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Rahman SH, Urquhart R, Molinari M. Neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2017; 9:457-465. [PMID: 29290916 PMCID: PMC5740086 DOI: 10.4251/wjgo.v9.i12.457] [Citation(s) in RCA: 15] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/25/2017] [Revised: 08/24/2017] [Accepted: 09/16/2017] [Indexed: 02/05/2023] Open
Abstract
The use of neoadjuvant therapies has played a major role for borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancers (PCs). For this group of patients, preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiation has increased the likelihood of surgery with negative resection margins and overall survival. On the other hand, for patients with resectable PC, the main rationale for neoadjuvant therapy is that the overall survival with current strategies is unsatisfactory. There is a consensus that we need new treatments to improve the overall survival and quality of life of patients with PC. However, without strong scientific evidence supporting the theoretical advantages of neoadjuvant therapies, these potential benefits might turn out not to be worth the risk of tumors progression while waiting for surgery. The focus of this paper is to provide the readers an overview of the most recent evidence on this subject.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Robin Urquhart
- Department of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax B3H 2Y9, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - Michele Molinari
- Department of Surgery, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Adamska A, Domenichini A, Falasca M. Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Current and Evolving Therapies. Int J Mol Sci 2017; 18:E1338. [PMID: 28640192 PMCID: PMC5535831 DOI: 10.3390/ijms18071338] [Citation(s) in RCA: 364] [Impact Index Per Article: 52.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/21/2017] [Revised: 06/01/2017] [Accepted: 06/13/2017] [Indexed: 02/07/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aleksandra Adamska
- Metabolic Signalling Group, School of Biomedical Sciences, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
| | - Alice Domenichini
- Metabolic Signalling Group, School of Biomedical Sciences, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
| | - Marco Falasca
- Metabolic Signalling Group, School of Biomedical Sciences, Curtin Health Innovation Research Institute, Curtin University, Perth, WA 6102, Australia.
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
de Geus SWL, Evans DB, Bliss LA, Eskander MF, Smith JK, Wolff RA, Miksad RA, Weinstein MC, Tseng JF. Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgical strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2016; 42:1552-60. [PMID: 27570116 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.07.016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 41] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/13/2016] [Revised: 07/10/2016] [Accepted: 07/21/2016] [Indexed: 12/18/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Neoadjuvant therapy is gaining acceptance as a valid treatment option for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer; however, its value for clearly resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to use a Markov decision analysis model, in the absence of adequately powered randomized trials, to compare the life expectancy (LE) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of neoadjuvant therapy to conventional upfront surgical strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS A Markov decision model was created to compare two strategies: attempted pancreatic resection followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by restaging with, if appropriate, attempted pancreatic resection. Data obtained through a comprehensive systematic search in PUBMED of the literature from 2000 to 2015 were used to estimate the probabilities used in the model. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS Of the 786 potentially eligible studies identified, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria and were used to extract the probabilities used in the model. Base case analyses of the model showed a higher LE (32.2 vs. 26.7 months) and QALE (25.5 vs. 20.8 quality-adjusted life months) for patients in the neoadjuvant therapy arm compared to upfront surgery. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses for LE and QALE revealed that neoadjuvant therapy is favorable in 59% and 60% of the cases respectively. CONCLUSION(S) Although conceptual, these data suggest that neoadjuvant therapy offers substantial benefit in LE and QALE for resectable pancreatic cancer patients. These findings highlight the value of further prospective randomized trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy to conventional upfront surgical strategies.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S W L de Geus
- Surgical Outcomes Analysis & Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Department of Surgery, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - D B Evans
- Department of Surgery, Medical College of Wisconsin, 8701 Watertown Plank Road, Milwaukee, WI 53226, USA.
| | - L A Bliss
- Surgical Outcomes Analysis & Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Department of Surgery, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - M F Eskander
- Surgical Outcomes Analysis & Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Department of Surgery, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - J K Smith
- Surgical Outcomes Analysis & Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Department of Surgery, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - R A Wolff
- Department of Gastrointestinal Oncology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 1515 Holcombe Blvd, Houston, TX 77030, USA.
| | - R A Miksad
- Surgical Outcomes Analysis & Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Department of Surgery, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| | - M C Weinstein
- Department of Health Policy and Management, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, 677 Huntington Avenue, Boston, MA 02115, USA.
| | - J F Tseng
- Surgical Outcomes Analysis & Research, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School, Department of Surgery, 330 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Eskander MF, Bliss LA, Tseng JF. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Curr Probl Surg 2016; 53:107-54. [DOI: 10.1067/j.cpsurg.2016.01.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2015] [Accepted: 01/04/2016] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
|
10
|
Motoi F, Ishida K, Fujishima F, Ottomo S, Oikawa M, Okada T, Shimamura H, Takemura S, Ono F, Akada M, Nakagawa K, Katayose Y, Egawa S, Unno M. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 for resectable and borderline pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: results from a prospective multi-institutional phase 2 trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20:3794-801. [PMID: 23838925 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-013-3129-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 99] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/05/2013] [Indexed: 12/24/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Surgical resection is the only curative strategy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but recurrence rates are high even after purported curative resection. First-line treatment with gemcitabine and S-1 (GS) is associated with promising antitumor activity with a high response rate. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility and efficacy of GS in the neoadjuvant setting. METHODS In a multi-institutional single-arm phase 2 study, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with gemcitabine and S-1, repeated every 21 days, was administered for two cycles (NAC-GS) to patients with resectable and borderline PDAC. The primary end point was the 2-year survival rate. Secondary end points were feasibility, resection rate, pathological effect, recurrence-free survival, and tumor marker status. RESULTS Of 36 patients enrolled, 35 were eligible for this clinical trial conducted between 2008 and 2010. The most common toxicity was neutropenia in response to 90% of the relative dose intensity. Responses to NAC included radiological tumor shrinkage (69%) and decreases in CA19-9 levels (89%). R0 resection was performed for 87% in resection, and the morbidity rate (40%) was acceptable. The 2-year survival rate of the total cohort was 45.7%. Patients who underwent resection without metastases after NAC-GS (n = 27) had an increased median overall survival (34.7 months) compared with those who did not undergo resection (P = 0.0017). CONCLUSIONS NAC-GS was well tolerated and safe when used in a multi-institutional setting. The R0 resection rate and the 2-year survival rate analysis are encouraging for patients with resectable and borderline PDAC.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Fuyuhiko Motoi
- Division of Gastroenterological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, Tohoku University, Sendai, Japan,
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Current world literature. Curr Opin Organ Transplant 2013; 18:111-30. [PMID: 23299306 DOI: 10.1097/mot.0b013e32835daf68] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
12
|
Riall TS, Brown KM. Individualizing care for locoregional pancreatic cancer? J Surg Res 2012; 179:41-4. [PMID: 22221606 DOI: 10.1016/j.jss.2011.10.041] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/13/2011] [Revised: 10/13/2011] [Accepted: 10/26/2011] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Taylor S Riall
- Department of Surgery, The University of Texas Medical Branch, Galveston, TX 77555-0541, USA.
| | | |
Collapse
|