Screening/surveillance programs for pancreatic cancer in familial high-risk individuals: A systematic review and proportion meta-analysis of screening results

Progress report: Peutz-Jeghers syndrome

Peutz-Jeghers syndrome is a rare, autosomal dominant polyposis syndrome. Presenting with a remarkable phenotype including development of characteristic gastrointestinal polyps, mucocutaneous pigmentations, and an increased risk of cancer, the syndrome has been subject to many studies concerning the natural course of disease. In most patients, pathogenic germline variants are detected in the STK11 gene including cases of mosaicism and structural variants. Yet, studies assessing the effect of surveillance, understanding of cancer development, as well as clinical studies evaluating chemoprevention are lacking. In addition, the impact of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome on mental health, education, and family planning are insufficiently addressed. In this progress report, we describe current knowledge, clinical phenotype, surveillance strategies, and future areas of research.

Early detection of pancreatic cancer in the era of precision medicine

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the third leading cause of cancer-related mortality and it is often diagnosed at advanced stages due to non-specific clinical presentation. Disease detection at localized disease stage followed by surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment. In this era of precision medicine, a multifaceted approach to early detection of PDAC includes targeted screening in high-risk populations, serum biomarkers and "liquid biopsies", and artificial intelligence augmented tumor detection from radiologic examinations. In this review, we will review these emerging techniques in the early detection of PDAC.

Comparison of intra- and inter-reader agreement of abbreviated versus comprehensive MRCP for pancreatic cyst surveillance

OBJECTIVE

To retrospectively compare inter- and intra-reader agreement of abbreviated MRCP (aMRCP) with comprehensive MRI (cMRCP) protocol for detection of worrisome features, high-risk stigmata, and concomitant pancreatic cancer in pancreatic cyst surveillance.

METHODS

151 patients (104 women, mean age: 69[10] years) with baseline and follow-up contrast-enhanced MRIs were included. This comprised 138 patients under cyst surveillance with 5-year follow-up showing no pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), 6 with pancreatic cystic lesion-derived malignancy, and 7 with concomitant PDAC. The aMRCP protocol used four sequences (axial and coronal Half-Fourier Single-shot Turbo-spin-Echo, axial T1 fat-saturated pre-contrast, and 3D-MRCP), while cMRCP included all standard sequences, including post-contrast. Three blinded abdominal radiologists assessed baseline cyst characteristics, worrisome features, high-risk stigmata, and PDAC signs using both aMRCP and cMRCP, with a 2-week washout period. Intra- and inter-reader agreement were calculated using Fleiss' multi-rater kappa and Intra-class Correlation Coefficient (ICC). 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated.

RESULTS

Cyst size, growth, and abrupt main pancreatic duct transition had strong intra- and inter-reader agreement. Intra-reader agreement was ICC = 0.93-0.99 for cyst size, ICC = 0.71-1.00 for cyst growth, and kappa = 0.83-1.00 for abrupt duct transition. Inter-reader agreement for cyst size was ICC = 0.86 (aMRCP) and ICC = 0.83 (cMRCP), and for abrupt duct transition was kappa = 0.84 (aMRCP) and kappa = 0.69 (cMRCP). Thickened cyst wall, mural nodule and cyst-duct communication demonstrated varying intra-reader agreements and poor inter-reader agreements.

CONCLUSION

aMRCP showed high intra- and inter-reader agreement for most pancreatic cyst parameters that highly rely on T2-weighted sequences.

Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance and Survival of High-Risk Individuals

Importance

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a deadly disease with increasing incidence. The majority of PDACs are incurable at presentation, but population-based screening is not recommended. Surveillance of high-risk individuals for PDAC may lead to early detection, but the survival benefit is unproven.

Objective

To compare the survival of patients with surveillance-detected PDAC with US national data.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This comparative cohort study was conducted in multiple US academic medical centers participating in the Cancer of the Pancreas Screening program, which screens high-risk individuals with a familial or genetic predisposition for PDAC. The comparison cohort comprised patients with PDAC matched for age, sex, and year of diagnosis from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program. The Cancer of the Pancreas Screening program originated in 1998, and data collection was done through 2021. The data analysis was performed from April 29, 2022, through April 10, 2023.

Exposures

Endoscopic ultrasonography or magnetic resonance imaging performed annually and standard-of-care surgical and/or oncologic treatment.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Stage of PDAC at diagnosis, overall survival (OS), and PDAC mortality were compared using descriptive statistics and conditional logistic regression, Cox proportional hazards regression, and competing risk regression models. Sensitivity analyses and adjustment for lead-time bias were also conducted.

Results

A total of 26 high-risk individuals (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 65.8 [9.5] years; 15 female [57.7%]) with PDAC were compared with 1504 SEER control patients with PDAC (mean [SD] age at diagnosis, 66.8 [7.9] years; 771 female [51.3%]). The median primary tumor diameter of the 26 high-risk individuals was smaller than in the control patients (2.5 [range, 0.6-5.0] vs 3.6 [range, 0.2-8.0] cm, respectively; P < .001). The high-risk individuals were more likely to be diagnosed with a lower stage (stage I, 10 [38.5%]; stage II, 8 [30.8%]) than matched control patients (stage I, 155 [10.3%]; stage II, 377 [25.1%]; P < .001). The PDAC mortality rate at 5 years was lower for high-risk individuals than control patients (43% vs 86%; hazard ratio, 3.58; 95% CI, 2.01-6.39; P < .001), and high-risk individuals lived longer than matched control patients (median OS, 61.7 [range, 1.9-147.3] vs 8.0 [range, 1.0-131.0] months; 5-year OS rate, 50% [95% CI, 32%-80%] vs 9% [95% CI, 7%-11%]).

Conclusions and Relevance

These findings suggest that surveillance of high-risk individuals may lead to detection of smaller, lower-stage PDACs and improved survival.

Gastrointestinal Cancer Precursor Conditions and Their Detection

Gastrointestinal cancers are a leading cause of cancer morbidity and mortality. Many gastrointestinal cancers develop from cancer precursor lesions, which are commonly found in individuals with hereditary cancer syndromes. Hereditary cancer syndromes have advanced our understanding of cancer development and progression and have facilitated the evaluation of cancer prevention and interception efforts. Common gastrointestinal hereditary cancer syndromes, including their organ-specific cancer risk and surveillance recommendations, are reviewed in this article. The management of common gastroesophageal, pancreatic, and colonic precursor lesions is also discussed, regardless of their genetic background. Further research is needed to advance chemoprevention and immunoprevention strategies.

The Italian registry of families at risk for pancreatic cancer (IRFARPC): implementation and evolution of a national program for pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk individuals

Screening programs for early detection and treatment of pancreatic cancer (PC) and its precursor lesions are increasingly implemented worldwide to reduce disease-specific lethality. Given the relatively low prevalence of the disease, the ideal target of such approaches is an enriched cohort of individuals harboring a lifetime risk of developing PC significantly higher compared to the general population, given either a substantial aggregation of PC cases in their family (i.e. familial pancreatic cancer) or a genomic landscape enriched with pathogenic variants associated with pancreatic carcinogenesis (i.e. mutation carriers). In Italy, a national registry for the census and surveillance of high-risk individuals for PC was launched in 2015, enrolling some 1200 subjects as of today. In this perspective, the scientific background, multi-level structure, and evolution of IRFARPC are outlined, as well as its long-term results, future developments, and areas for improvement.

Surveillance of Individuals at High Risk of Developing Pancreatic Cancer: A Prevalence Meta-analysis to Estimate the Rate of Low-yield Surgery

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the rate of low-yield surgery, defined as no high-grade dysplastic precursor lesions or T1N0M0 pancreatic cancer at pathology, during pancreatic cancer surveillance.

BACKGROUND

Global efforts have been made in pancreatic cancer surveillance to anticipate the diagnosis of pancreatic cancer at an early stage and improve survival in high-risk individuals (HRIs) with a hereditary predisposition. The negative impact of pancreatic cancer surveillance when surgery is performed for low-grade dysplasia or a non-neoplastic condition is not well quantified.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search and prevalence meta-analysis was performed for studies reporting surgery with final diagnoses other than those defined by the Cancer of the Pancreas Screening (CAPS) goals from January 2000 to July 2023. The secondary outcome was the pooled proportion of final diagnoses matching the CAPS goals (PROSPERO: #CRD42022300408).

RESULTS

Twenty-three articles with 5027 patients (median 109 patients/study, interquartile range 251) were included. The pooled prevalence of low-yield surgery was 2.1% (95% CI: 0.9-3.7, I2 : 83%). In the subgroup analysis, this prevalence was nonsignificantly higher in studies that only included familial pancreatic cancer subjects without known pathogenic variants, compared with those enrolling pathogenic variant carriers. No effect modifiers were found. Overall, the pooled prevalence of subjects under surveillance who had a pancreatic resection that contained target lesions was 0.8% (95% CI, 0.3-1.5, I2 : 24%]. The temporal analysis showed that the rate of low-yield surgeries decreased in the last decades and stabilized at around 1% (test for subgroup differences P <0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The risk of "low-yield" surgery during pancreatic cancer surveillance is relatively low but should be thoroughly discussed with individuals under surveillance.

Pancreatic Cancer Screening for At-Risk Individuals (Pancreas Scan Study): Yield, Harms, and Outcomes From a Prospective Multicenter Study

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines endorse pancreatic cancer screening in genetically susceptible individuals. We conducted a prospective, multicenter study to determine yield, harms, and outcomes of pancreatic cancer screening.

METHODS

All high-risk individuals undergoing pancreatic cancer screening at 5 centers from 2020 to 2022 were prospectively enrolled. Pancreas findings were designated as low-risk (fatty or chronic pancreatitis-like changes), intermediate-risk (neuroendocrine tumor [NET] <2 cm or branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm [IPMN]), or high-risk lesions (high-grade pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia/dysplasia, main-duct IPMN, NET >2 cm, or pancreatic cancer). Harms from screening included adverse events during screening or undergoing low-yield pancreatic surgery. Annual screening was performed using endoscopic ultrasound and or magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. Annual screening for new-onset diabetes using fasting blood sugar was also performed ( ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT05006131).

RESULTS

During the study period, 252 patients underwent pancreatic cancer screening. Mean age was 59.9 years, 69% were female, and 79.4% were White. Common indications were BRCA 1/2 (36.9%), familial pancreatic cancer syndrome kindred (31.7%), ataxia telangiectasia mutated (3.5%), Lynch syndrome (6.7%), Peutz-Jeghers (4.3%), and familial atypical multiple mole melanoma (3.5%). Low-risk lesions were noted in 23.4% and intermediate-risk lesions in 31.7%, almost all of which were branch-duct IPMN without worrisome features. High-risk lesions were noted in 2 patients (0.8%), who were diagnosed with pancreas cancer at stages T2N1M0 and T2N1M1. Prediabetes was noted in 18.2% and new-onset diabetes in 1.7%. Abnormal fasting blood sugar was not associated with pancreatic lesions. There were no adverse events from screening tests, and no patient underwent low-yield pancreatic surgery.

DISCUSSION

Pancreatic cancer screening detected high-risk lesions with lower frequency than previously reported. No harms from screening were noted.

Cost-effectiveness of pancreas surveillance: The CDKN2A-p16-Leiden cohort

BACKGROUND

CDKN2A-p16-Leiden mutation carriers have a high lifetime risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), with very poor survival. Surveillance may improve prognosis.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of surveillance, as compared to no surveillance.

METHODS

In 2000, a surveillance program was initiated at Leiden University Medical Center with annual MRI and optional endoscopic ultrasound. Data were collected on the resection rate of screen-detected tumors and on survival. The Kaplan-Meier method and a parametric cure model were used to analyze and compare survival. Based on the surveillance and survival data from the screening program, a state-transition model was constructed to estimate lifelong outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 347 mutation carriers participated in the surveillance program. PDAC was detected in 31 patients (8.9%) and the tumor could be resected in 22 patients (71.0%). Long-term cure among patients with resected PDAC was estimated at 47.1% (p < 0.001). The surveillance program was estimated to reduce mortality from PDAC by 12.1% and increase average life expectancy by 2.10 years. Lifelong costs increased by €13,900 per patient, with a cost-utility ratio of €14,000 per quality-adjusted life year gained. For annual surveillance to have an acceptable cost-effectiveness in other settings, lifetime PDAC risk needs to be 10% or higher.

CONCLUSION

The tumor could be resected in most patients with a screen-detected PDAC. These patients had considerably better survival and as a result annual surveillance was found to be cost-effective.

Familial pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer (PC) carries a poor prognosis with an overall 5-year survival of less than 10%. Early diagnosis, though cumbersome, is essential to allow complete surgical resection. Therefore, primary and secondary prevention are critical to reduce the incidence and to potentially prevent mortality. Given a relatively low lifetime risk of developing PC, identification of high-risk individuals is crucial to allow identification of pre-malignant lesions and small, localized tumors. Although 85-90% of PC cases are sporadic, we could consider risk stratification for the 5-10% of patients with a family history and the 3-5% of cases due to inherited genetic syndromes. These high-risk populations should be considered for screening and surveillance of PC. MRI/MRCP and EUS are the preferred modalities, due to their high sensitivity in lesion detection. Surveillance should be personalized, considering genetics and family history, and assessment of risk factors that may increase cancer risk. Screening programs should be limited to tertiary referral center, with high-volumes and adequate facilities to manage these patients.

Diagnosis and Management of Pancreatic Cysts: A Comprehensive Review of the Literature

The prevalence of pancreatic cysts has been rising due to the widespread use of cross-sectional imaging (CT scan and MRI) of the abdomen. While most pancreatic cysts are benign and do not require treatment or surveillance, a significant minority are premalignant and rarely malignant. The risk stratification of these lesions is not straightforward, and individual risk assessment, cyst size, distribution, and alarming morphologic features (when present) can guide the next steps in management. Neoplastic pancreatic cysts are mucinous or non-mucinous. Endoscopic ultrasound with fine-needle aspiration is often required to classify pancreatic cysts into mucinous and non-mucinous cysts and to assess the malignant potential. Advances in endoscopic techniques (confocal laser endomicroscopy, microforceps biopsy) can provide a definitive diagnosis of pancreatic cysts in some cases; however, the use of these techniques involves a higher risk of adverse events.

Standardization of MRI Screening and Reporting in Individuals With Elevated Risk of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Consensus Statement of the PRECEDE Consortium

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most aggressive malignancies, with a dismal survival rate. Screening the general population for early detection of PDAC is not recommended, but because early detection improves survival, high-risk individuals, defined as those meeting criteria based on a family history of PDAC and/or the presence of known pathogenic germline variant genes with PDAC risk, are recommended to undergo screening with MRI and/or endoscopic ultrasound at regular intervals. The Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection (PRECEDE) Consortium was formed in 2018 and is composed of gastroenterologists, geneticists, pancreatic surgeons, radiologists, statisticians, and researchers from 40 sites in North America, Europe, and Asia. The overarching goal of the PRECEDE Consortium is to facilitate earlier diagnosis of PDAC for high-risk individuals to increase survival of the disease. A standardized MRI protocol and reporting template are needed to enhance the quality of screening examinations, improve consistency of clinical management, and facilitate multiinstitutional research. We present a consensus statement to standardize MRI screening and reporting for individuals with elevated risk of pancreatic cancer.

Successful Pancreatic Cancer Screening Among Individuals at Elevated Risk Using Endoscopic Ultrasound and Magnetic Resonance Imaging: A Community Hospital Experience

OBJECTIVES

Guidelines for testing individuals at risk (IAR) for developing pancreatic duct adenocarcinoma (PC) are being advanced from university hospital populations. We implemented a screen-in criteria and protocol for IAR for PC in our community hospital setting.

METHODS

Eligibility was based on germline status and/or family history of PC. Longitudinal testing continued, alternating between endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The primary objective was to analyze pancreatic conditions and their associations with risk factors. The secondary objective was to evaluate the outcomes and complications resulting from testing.

RESULTS

Over 93 months, 102 individuals completed baseline EUS, and 26 (25%) met defined endpoints of any abnormal findings in the pancreas. Average enrollment was 40 months, and all participants with endpoints continued standard surveillance. Two participants (1.8%) had endpoint findings requiring surgery for premalignant lesions. Increasing age predicted for endpoint findings. Analysis of longitudinal testing suggested reliability between the EUS and MRI results.

CONCLUSIONS

In our community hospital population, baseline EUS was effective in identifying the majority of findings; advancing age correlated with a greater chance of abnormalities. No differences were observed between EUS and MRI findings. Screening programs for PC among IAR can be successfully performed in the community setting.

Clinical Significance of Germline Pathogenic Variants among 51 Cancer Predisposition Genes in an Unselected Cohort of Italian Pancreatic Cancer Patients

Multigene germline panel testing is recommended for Pancreatic Cancer (PC) patients; however, for non-BRCA1/2 genes, the clinical utility is unclear. A comprehensive multi-gene assessment in unselected Italian PC patients is missing. We evaluated the prevalence and impact of Pathogenic Variants (PV) in 51 PC susceptibility genes in a real-world series of 422 Italian PC patients unselected for Family History (FH), compared the clinical characteristics and conducted survival analyses. 17% of patients had PVs (70/422), mainly in BRCA1/2 (4.5%, all <70 y), CDKN2A (4.5%, all >50 y), ATM (2.1%). PV carriers were younger (64 vs. 67; p = 0.02) and had more frequent personal/FH of PC, melanoma and breast/ovarian cancer (all p < 0.05). The Overall Survival (OS) was longer in patients carrying PVs (HR 0.78; p = 0.090), comprising ATM carriers (HR 0.33; p = 0.054). In the oxaliplatin-treated subset, PV carriers showed better control of the disease, although this was not statistically significant (67% vs. 56%). CDKN2A, BRCA2 and ATM were the most frequently altered genes. ATM PVs were positively associated with OS in 41% of PV carriers, 60% of whom carried CDKN2A,BRCA2 or ATM PVs, had negative FH and would have been missed by traditional referral. Thus, CDKN2A and ATM should be added to BRCA1/2 testing regardless of FH.

Familial Pancreatic Cancer

Individuals at increased risk of developing pancreatic cancer, including those with a significant family history of the disease and those with pancreatic cancer susceptibility gene variants, can benefit from pancreas surveillance. Most pancreatic cancers diagnosed during surveillance are early-stage and such patients can achieve long-term survival. Determining who should undergo pancreas surveillance is still a work-in-progress, but the main tools clinicians use to estimate an individual's risk of pancreatic cancer are patient's age, the extent of their family history of pancreatic cancer, and whether or not they have a pancreatic cancer susceptibility gene mutation.

Current Screening Strategies for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a dreaded malignancy with a dismal 5-year survival rate despite maximal efforts on optimizing treatment strategies. Radical surgery is the only potential curative procedure. Unfortunately, the majority of patients are diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic disease, which renders them ineligible for curative resection. Early detection of PDAC is thus considered to be the most effective way to improve survival. In this regard, pancreatic screening has been proposed to improve results by detecting asymptomatic stages of PDAC and its precursors. There is now evidence of benefits of systematic surveillance in high-risk individuals, and the current guidelines emphasize the potential of screening to affect overall survival in individuals with genetic susceptibility syndromes or familial occurrence of PDAC. Here we aim to summarize the current knowledge about screening strategies for PDAC, including the latest epidemiological data, risk factors, associated hereditary syndromes, available screening modalities, benefits, limitations, as well as management implications.

Pancreatic Cancer: Pathogenesis, Screening, Diagnosis, and Treatment

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a clinically challenging cancer, due to both its late stage at diagnosis and its resistance to chemotherapy. However, recent advances in our understanding of the biology of PDAC have revealed new opportunities for early detection and targeted therapy of PDAC. In this review, we discuss the pathogenesis of PDAC, including molecular alterations in tumor cells, cellular alterations in the tumor microenvironment, and population-level risk factors. We review the current status of surveillance and early detection of PDAC, including populations at high risk and screening approaches. We outline the diagnostic approach to PDAC and highlight key treatment considerations, including how therapeutic approaches change with disease stage and targetable subtypes of PDAC. Recent years have seen significant improvements in our approaches to detect and treat PDAC, but large-scale, coordinated efforts will be needed to maximize the clinical impact for patients and improve overall survival.

Impact of comprehensive family history and genetic analysis in the multidisciplinary pancreatic tumor clinic setting

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing is recommended for all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Prior research demonstrates that multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer clinics (MDPCs) improve treatment- and survival-related outcomes for PDAC patients. However, limited information exists regarding the utility of integrated genetics in the MDPC setting. We hypothesized that incorporating genetics in an MDPC serving both PDAC patients and high-risk individuals (HRI) could: (1) improve compliance with guideline-based genetic testing for PDAC patients, and (2) optimize HRI identification and PDAC surveillance participation to improve early detection and survival.

METHODS

Demographics, genetic testing results, and pedigrees were reviewed for PDAC patients and HRI at one institution over 45 months. Genetic testing analyzed 16 PDAC-associated genes at minimum.

RESULTS

Overall, 969 MDPC subjects were evaluated during the study period; another 56 PDAC patients were seen outside the MDPC. Among 425 MDPC PDAC patients, 333 (78.4%) completed genetic testing; 29 (8.7%) carried a PDAC-related pathogenic germline variant (PGV). Additionally, 32 (9.6%) met familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) criteria. These PDAC patients had 191 relatives eligible for surveillance or genetic testing. Only 2/56 (3.6%) non-MDPC PDAC patients completed genetic testing (p < 0.01). Among 544 HRI, 253 (46.5%) had a known PGV or a designation of FPC, and were eligible for surveillance at baseline; of the remainder, 15/291 (5.2%) were eligible following genetic testing and PGV identification.

CONCLUSION

Integrating genetics into the multidisciplinary setting significantly improved genetic testing compliance by reducing logistical barriers for PDAC patients, and clarified cancer risks for their relatives while conserving clinical resources. Overall, we identified 206 individuals newly eligible for surveillance or genetic testing (191 relatives of MDPC PDAC patients, and 15 HRI from this cohort), enabling continuity of care for PDAC patients and at-risk relatives in one clinic.

Germline Aberrations in Pancreatic Cancer: Implications for Clinical Care

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an extremely poor prognosis and represents a major public health issue, as both its incidence and mortality are expecting to increase steeply over the next years. Effective screening strategies are lacking, and most patients are diagnosed with unresectable disease precluding the only chance of cure. Therapeutic options for advanced disease are limited, and the treatment paradigm is still based on chemotherapy, with a few rare exceptions to targeted therapies. Germline variants in cancer susceptibility genes-particularly those involved in mechanisms of DNA repair-are emerging as promising targets for PDAC treatment and prevention. Hereditary PDAC is part of the spectrum of several syndromic disorders, and germline testing of PDAC patients has relevant implications for broad cancer prevention. Germline aberrations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are predictive biomarkers of response to poly(adenosine diphosphate-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor olaparib and platinum-based chemotherapy in PDAC, while mutations in mismatch repair genes identify patients suitable for immune checkpoint inhibitors. This review provides a timely and comprehensive overview of germline aberrations in PDAC and their implications for clinical care. It also discusses the need for optimal approaches to better select patients for PARP inhibitor therapy, novel therapeutic opportunities under clinical investigation, and preclinical models for cancer susceptibility and drug discovery.

Standardization of EUS imaging and reporting in high-risk individuals of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: consensus statement of the Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection Consortium

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an aggressive disease most often diagnosed after local progression or metastatic dissemination, precluding resection and resulting in a high mortality rate. For individuals with elevated personal risk of the development of pancreatic cancer, EUS is a frequently used advanced imaging and diagnostic modality. However, variability in the expertise and definition of EUS findings exists among gastroenterologists, as well as a lack of standardized reporting of relevant findings at the time of examination. Adoption of standardized EUS reporting, using a universally accepted and agreed on terminology, is needed.

METHODS

A consensus statement designed to create a standardized reporting template was authored by a multidisciplinary group of experts in pancreatic diseases that includes gastroenterologists, radiologists, surgeons, oncologists, and geneticists. This statement was developed using a modified Delphi process as part of the Pancreatic Cancer Early Detection Consortium, and >75% agreement was required to reach consensus.

RESULTS

We identified reporting elements and present standardized reporting templates for EUS indications, procedural data, EUS image capture, and descriptors of findings, tissue sampling, and postprocedural assessment of adequacy.

CONCLUSIONS

Adoption of this standardized EUS reporting template should improve consistency in clinical decision-making for individuals with elevated risk of pancreatic cancer by providing complete and accurate reporting of pancreatic abnormalities. Standardization will also help to facilitate research and clinical trial design by using clearly defined and consistent imaging descriptions, thus allowing for comparison of results across different centers.

Late-Stage Pancreatic Cancer Detected During High-Risk Individual Surveillance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Identification and resection of successful targets, that is, T₁ N₀M₀ pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and high-grade precursors during surveillance of high-risk individuals (HRIs) confers improved survival. Late-stage PDACs refer to T_2-4 N₀M₀ and nodal or distant metastatic PDAC stages diagnosed during the follow-up phase of HRI surveillance. This study aimed to quantify late-stage PDACs during HRI surveillance and identify associated clinicoradiologic factors.

METHODS

A systematic search (PROSPERO:CRD42018117189) from Cochrane Library, Embase, Google Scholar, Medline, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science was last performed on April 18, 2021. Only original HRI surveillance manuscripts that specified follow-up strategies were included, and studies with only baseline information were excluded. Cumulative incidences of advanced neoplasia: high-grade precursors and all PDACs, and surveillance-detected/interval late-stage PDACs were calculated through random-effects model. Incidence of late-stage PDACs underwent metaregression to identify association with HRI clinicoradiologic features. Publication bias was assessed through the funnel plot and Egger's regression line.

RESULTS

Thirteen original surveillance studies included 2169 HRIs followed over 7302.72 patient-years. Cumulative incidence of advanced neoplasia and late-stage PDACs was 3.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.6-7.4) and 1.7 (95% CI: 0.2-4.0) per 1000 patient-years, respectively. Late-stage PDACs lacked significant association with surveillance imaging, baseline pancreatic morphology, study location, genetic background, gender, or age. Limited information on diagnostic error, symptoms, timing of presentation, lesion site, and surveillance adherence precluded formal meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

A sizeable proportion of late-stage PDACs were detected during follow-up. Their incidence lacked association with baseline clinicoradiologic features. Further causal investigation of stage-based outcomes is warranted for overall improvement in HRI surveillance.

High signal intensity on diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance images is a useful finding for detecting early-stage pancreatic cancer

Purpose

Early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) may improve the prognosis. We evaluated novel imaging findings that may contribute to early detection.

Methods

This single-center, retrospective study enrolled 37 patients with a localized main pancreatic duct (MPD) stricture and no obvious pancreatic mass. All patients underwent endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography and brush sampling with cytology and serial pancreatic juice aspiration cytologic examination via endoscopic naso-pancreatic drainage. Patients with cytology-confirmed malignancy underwent surgical resection. The remaining patients were followed by contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography.

Results

Twenty patients had confirmed malignancy (cancer group) and 17 did not (non-cancer group). Age, MPD stricture location, and PDAC risk factors were similar, but the sex predominance and symptom rate differed between the two groups. In the cancer group, 17 patients were diagnosed by cytology and three by clinical symptoms. CECT, MRI, and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) revealed no solid tumors in either group. CECT revealed no significant differences between groups. Diffusion-weighted MRI revealed significant differences in the signal intensity between groups. EUS detected indistinct and small hypoechoic areas in 70% and 41.2% of patients in the cancer and non-cancer groups, respectively. In the cancer group, 11 were diagnosed with cancer at the first indication, and nine were diagnosed at follow-up; the prognosis did not differ between these two subgroups.ss

Conclusions

High signal intensity in diffusion-weighted MRI may be useful for detecting early-stage PDAC and may be an indication for surgical resection even without pathologic confirmation.

Clinical trial registration

The study was a registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN000039623).

Graphic abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00261-021-03199-1.

Validation of the ENDPAC model: Identifying new-onset diabetics at risk of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with new-onset diabetes are known to be at a higher risk of developing pancreatic cancer. The Enriching New-Onset Diabetes for Pancreatic Cancer (ENDPAC) model was recently developed to identify new-onset diabetics with this higher risk. Further validation is needed before the ENDPAC model is implemented as part of a screening program to identify pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective case-control study was performed; a cohort of patients with new-onset diabetes was identified using hemoglobin A1c. Patients were scored by the ENDPAC model and then divided based on whether pancreatic cancer was diagnosed after the diagnosis of diabetes. The performance of the model was assessed globally and at different cutoffs.

RESULTS

There were 6254 controls and 48 cases of pancreatic cancer. Bivariate analysis showed that patients with pancreatic cancer lost weight before diagnosis while controls gained weight (-0.93 kg/m2 vs. 0.45 kg/m2, p < 0.00∗). Cases had a more significant increase in their HbA1C from one year before (1.3% vs. 0.82%, p = 0.02). Smoking and pancreatitis rates were higher in cases compared to controls (p < 0.00∗). The area under the curve (AUC) of the ENDPAC model was 0.72. A score >1 was the optimal cutoff. At this cutoff, the sensitivity was 56%, specificity was 75%, and pancreatic cancer prevalence increased from 0.78% at baseline to 1.7%.

CONCLUSION

The ENDPAC model was validated in an independent cohort of patients with new-onset diabetes.

Cancer surveillance awareness and practice among families at increased risk for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Early detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an important goal for improving survival. Individuals who meet published guidelines for surveillance may be underidentified, and family communication about risk represents a pathway to increasing participation in surveillance. We investigated the uptake of and barriers to surveillance in at-risk relatives of clinic patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective record review of patients with personal or family history of PDAC evaluated over 12 months. The first relative presenting to clinic (proband) reported surveillance status and reasons for nonparticipation for at-risk relatives. Descriptive analyses and Fisher's exact tests were conducted to evaluate differences in surveillance participation.

RESULTS

Among 193 at-risk relatives, 21% were in surveillance. The primary reasons for nonparticipation were lack of awareness (36%) and lack of interest (24%). Neither the sex nor the cancer status of probands impacted surveillance. At-risk relatives with familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) who also carried relevant pathogenic germline variants (PGVs) were more likely to undergo surveillance than those with FPC or PGVs alone (P = .003). Among families with PGVs, 59% of relatives potentially eligible for surveillance had not completed genetic testing.

CONCLUSION

PDAC surveillance is underutilized in high-risk families. Communication interventions to address informational needs and decisional support could improve outcomes.

Gress T, Langer P, P. Slater E. The German National Case Collection for Familial Pancreatic Carcinoma (FaPaCa)—Knowledge Gained in 20 Years

BACKGROUND

Familial pancreatic carcinoma (FPC) is a rare hereditary tumor syndrome with a heterogeneous clinical phenotype. The study of FPC also contributes to a better understanding of the more common sporadic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). We report on the past 20 years' experience of the German National Case Collection for Familial Pancreatic Carcinoma (FaPaCa) of the German Cancer Aid (Deutsche Krebshilfe).

METHODS

From 1999 onward, families in which at least two first-degree relatives had PDAC, and which did not meet the criteria for any other tumor syndrome, have been entered into the FaPaCa registry and analyzed both clinically and with molecular genetic techniques. Persons at risk are offered the opportunity to participate in an early detection program.

RESULTS

From June 1999 to June 2019, 227 families (a total of 2579 persons) met the criteria for entry into the FaPaCa registry. PDAC was the sole tumor entity present in 37% of the families (95% confidence interval [31.1; 44.1]); in the remaining 63% [55.9; 68.9], other tumor types were present as well, particularly breast cancer (70 families, 31% [24.9; 37.3]), colon carcinoma (25 families, 11% [7.3; 15.8]) , and melanoma (22 families, 9.7% [6.2; 14.3]). The mode of inheritance of PDAC was autosomal dominant in 72% [65.5; 77.6] of the families. Predisposing germ-line mutations were found in 25 of the 150 (16.7%) families studied, in the following genes: BRCA2 (9 families), CDKN2A (5 families), PALB2 (4 families), BRCA1 (3 families), ATM (2 families), and CHEK2 (2 families). The early detection program revealed high-grade cancer precursor lesions or a PDAC in 5 of the participating 110 persons at risk (4.5%, [1.5; 10.3] during a period of observation of at least five years.

CONCLUSION

The care of families with FPC is complex and should be provided in centers with the necessary expertise. Prospective, controlled longitudinal studies are needed to determine whether the screening of persons at risk for PDAC truly lessens mortality and is cost-effective.

The Management of Peutz-Jeghers Syndrome: European Hereditary Tumour Group (EHTG) Guideline

The scientific data to guide the management of Peutz–Jeghers syndrome (PJS) are sparse. The available evidence has been reviewed and discussed by diverse medical specialists in the field of PJS to update the previous guideline from 2010 and formulate a revised practical guideline for colleagues managing PJS patients. Methods: Literature searches were performed using MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane. Evidence levels and recommendation strengths were assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A Delphi process was followed, with consensus being reached when ≥80% of the voting guideline committee members agreed. Recommendations and statements: The only recent guidelines available were for gastrointestinal and pancreatic management. These were reviewed and endorsed after confirming that no more recent relevant papers had been published. Literature searches were performed for additional questions and yielded a variable number of relevant papers depending on the subject addressed. Additional recommendations and statements were formulated. Conclusions: A decade on, the evidence base for recommendations remains poor, and collaborative studies are required to provide better data about this rare condition. Within these restrictions, multisystem, clinical management recommendations for PJS have been formulated.

Implications of Multigene Panel Testing on Psychosocial Outcomes: A Comparison of Patients With Pancreatic and Breast or Ovarian Cancer

PURPOSE

National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines for germline genetic testing have included pancreatic cancer in the context of additional family cancer history for many years but this was not recommended for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) independent of a family history until 2019. This hypothesis-generating study reports the results from multigene panel testing for PDAC patients at an academic medical center.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective longitudinal feasibility study examined responses to genetic counseling and multigene panel testing among PDAC and breast or ovarian cancer (BrOv) patients between October 2016 and November 2017. Pre- and post-test surveys assessed perceptions of genetic risk and testing, recall, comprehension, and emotional reactions to results using open-ended and closed-ended items.

RESULTS

Forty-six BrOv and 33 PDAC patients were enrolled, and 44 BrOv and 31 PDAC participants underwent genetic testing. Seven pathogenic variants were identified in six BrOv participants (13.6%), and three pathogenic variants were identified in three PDAC participants (9.7%). The majority of both cohorts expressed similar attitudes about the importance of genetic testing for their personal and family medical management and expressed accurate understanding of implications of their results. Although sample size was small, there were no significant differences between the BrOv and PDAC cohorts for positive or negative emotions.

CONCLUSION

This study points to high rates of positive emotions and low rates of negative emotions following genetic test results, suggesting that the emotional reactions to genetic test results are similar for patients with BrOv and PDAC, despite poor prognosis with PDAC diagnoses. Because of the unique needs of the PDAC population following diagnosis, a multidisciplinary approach to germline genetic testing following diagnosis may result in best patient and family member outcomes.

BRCA in Gastrointestinal Cancers: Current Treatments and Future Perspectives

A strong association between pancreatic cancer and BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is documented. Based on promising results of breast and ovarian cancers, several clinical trials with poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors (PARPi) are ongoing for gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies, especially for pancreatic cancer. Indeed, the POLO trial results provide promising and awaited changes for the pancreatic cancer therapeutic landscape. Contrariwise, for other gastrointestinal tumors, the rationale is currently only alleged. The role of BRCA mutation in gastrointestinal cancers is the subject of this review. In particular, we aim to provide the latest updates about novel therapeutic strategies that, exploiting DNA repair defects, promise to shape the future therapeutic scenario of GI cancers.

Italian registry of families at risk of pancreatic cancer: AISP Familial Pancreatic Cancer Study Group

Pancreatic cancer is one of the main causes of cancer-related death worldwide, with a survival rate around 9%. In Italy 13,500 new cases of pancreatic cancer occurred in 2019. It is estimated that at least 5% have a hereditary background. Surveillance is advisable for healthy individuals with specific genetic syndromes with or without family history of pancreatic cancer or members of families with multiple cases of pancreatic cancer, irrespective of genetic syndromes. In 2010 the Italian Association for the Study of the Pancreas (AISP) defined criteria to include individuals in such surveillance programs with the first-round results published in 2019. In order to include other categories at high-risk and increase the diagnostic yield of surveillance, these criteria have recently been modified. The present position paper presents the updated criteria of the Italian Registry of Families at Risk of Pancreatic Cancer (IRFARPC) with their diagnostic yield calculation. Also, AISP priority projects concerning: (a) increasing awareness of citizens and primary care physicians through a dedicated App; (b) increasing access to germline testing to personalize surveillance; (c) measuring psychological impact of surveillance; (d) investigating the role of risk-modifiers and (e) evaluating the cost-effectiveness and ability to save lives of the program are briefly presented.

AGA Clinical Practice Update on Pancreas Cancer Screening in High-Risk Individuals: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

The purpose of this American Gastroenterological Association Institute Clinical Practice Update is to describe the indications for screening for pancreas cancer in high-risk individuals.

METHODS

The evidence reviewed in this work is based on reports of pancreas cancer screening studies in high-risk individuals and expert opinion. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: Pancreas cancer screening should be considered in patients determined to be at high risk, including first-degree relatives of patients with pancreas cancer with at least 2 affected genetically related relatives. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: Pancreas cancer screening should be considered in patients with genetic syndromes associated with an increased risk of pancreas cancer, including all patients with Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, hereditary pancreatitis, patients with CDKN2A gene mutation, and patients with 1 or more first-degree relatives with pancreas cancer with Lynch syndrome, and mutations in BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, and ATM genes. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Genetic testing and counseling should be considered for familial pancreas cancer relatives who are eligible for surveillance. A positive germline mutation is associated with an increased risk of neoplastic progression and may also lead to screening for other relevant associated cancers. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Participation in a registry or referral to a pancreas Center of Excellence should be pursued when possible for high-risk patients undergoing pancreas cancer screening. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Clinicians should not screen average-risk individuals for pancreas cancer. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Pancreas cancer screening in high-risk individuals should begin at age 50 years, or 10 years younger than the initial age of familial onset. Screening should be initiated at age 40 years in CKDN2A and PRSS1 mutation carriers with hereditary pancreatitis and at age 35 years in the setting of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) should be used in combination as the preferred screening modalities in individuals undergoing pancreas cancer screening. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: The target detectable pancreatic neoplasms are resectable stage I pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and high-risk precursor neoplasms, such as intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms with high-grade dysplasia and some enlarged pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasias. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Screening intervals of 12 months should be considered when there are no concerning pancreas lesions, with shortened intervals and/or the performance of EUS in 6-12 months directed towards lesions determined to be low risk (by a multidisciplinary team). EUS evaluation should be performed within 3-6 months for indeterminate lesions and within 3 months for high-risk lesions, if surgical resection is not planned. New-onset diabetes in a high-risk individual should lead to additional diagnostic studies or change in surveillance interval. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Decisions regarding therapy directed towards abnormal findings detected during screening should be made by a dedicated multidisciplinary team together with the high-risk individual and their family. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: Surgical resection should be performed at high-volume centers. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: Clinicians should consider discontinuing pancreas cancer screening in high-risk individuals when they are more likely to die of non-pancreas cancer-related causes due to comorbidity and/or are not candidates for pancreas resection. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: The limitations and potential risks of pancreas cancer screening should be discussed with patients before initiating a screening program.

The emotional impact of surveillance programs for pancreatic cancer on high-risk individuals: A prospective analysis

OBJECTIVE

Literature shows that emotional status can influence participation in screening/surveillance programs, and that screening/surveillance programs may alter the psychological well-being of subjects examined. This study aims to assess if participating in a surveillance program for pancreatic cancer early detection is associated with abnormal levels of psychological distress in high-risk individuals (HRIs), compared to the general population.

METHODS

Fifty-four HRIs participating in a magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography (MRCP)-based surveillance program completed several psychological assessment questionnaires, investigating global functioning, self-efficacy, perceived stress, coping abilities, and social support. The questionnaires were administered by a clinical psychologist after the MRCP but before the subjects were informed about the results of the scans. The HRIs were subjects with strong familiarity of pancreatic cancer and/or carriers of known genetic mutations related to cancer susceptibility. The psychological assessment was made at the time of the first examination.

RESULTS

The population was characterized by an overall good psychological status. Scoring of our sample was comparable to the general population norms. The HRIs showed decent global functioning, high self-efficacy levels, low perceived stress in the last month prior to examination, efficient emotion-focused coping strategies, and an adequate social support system. The younger subjects' subpopulation only revealed higher levels of stress.

CONCLUSIONS

From a psychological point of view, an MRCP-based pancreatic cancer annual surveillance seemed not to influence the HRIs' psychological well-being, unless in young people. Further studies are needed to better establish if there are any changes in distress levels over time and how emotional status influences participation in surveillance programs.

GINS2 affects cell viability, cell apoptosis, and cell cycle progression of pancreatic cancer cells via MAPK/ERK pathway

Background and Objective: GINS complex subunit 2 (GINS2), a member of the GINS complex, is involved in DNA replication. GINS2 is upregulated in a variety of aggressive tumors, such as leukemia, breast cancer, and cervical cancer. However, the role of GINS2 in pancreatic cancer has still remained elusive. In this study, PANC-1 and BxPC-3 cell lines were chosen to perform experiments in vitro. Additionally, the effects of GINS2 interference on the cell viability, cell apoptosis, cell cycle, and tumor growth in nude mice were analyzed.

Methods: We utilized pancreatic cancer cell lines that knocked down GINS2 expression using small interference RNA (siRNA) and evaluated GINS2 expression using Western blot analysis. To explore the function of GINS2 in pancreatic cancer cell lines in vitro, MTT assay and flow cytometry were used. Additionally, we investigated the potential mechanism of GINS2 interference by identifying the MAPK/ERK pathway using Western blotting. Finally, PANC-1 cells with GINS2 knockdown were subcutaneously injected into nude mice to evaluate the effects of GINS2 on tumor growth in vivo.

Results: It was unveiled that GINS2 interference inhibited cell viability, induced cell cycle arrest at G1 phase, and enhanced apoptosis of pancreatic cancer cell lines. Western blot assay indicated that GINS2 interference increased the expression level of Bax, while the expression level of Bcl-2 was remarkably decreased. In addition, the expression levels of CDK4, CDK6, and Cyclin D1 were significantly reduced after treatment with GINS2 siRNA. Furthermore, GINS2 interference drastically attenuated the expression levels of MEK, p-MEK, ERK, and p-ERK, belonging to the MAPK/ERK pathway. The results of an established cancer xenograft model revealed that nude mice transplanted with cells expressing negative control (NC) exhibited larger and heavier tumors, while volume and weight of tumor were remarkably reduced in ones transplanted with cells expressing GINS2 siRNA.

Conclusions: GINS2 interference inhibited cell viability, induced cell cycle arrest, and promoted cell apoptosis of pancreatic cancer cell lines via the MAPK/ERK pathway, and our findings may be valuable for treating pancreatic cancer.

Current epidemiology of pancreatic cancer: Challenges and opportunities

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is an increasingly common disease worldwide. Having a better understanding of worldwide and regional epidemiologic features and risk factors of PC is essential to identify new approaches for prevention, early diagnosis, surveillance, and treatment. In this article, we review the epidemiologic features and risk factors for PC and discuss opportunities and challenges of PC future treatment.

Familial pancreatic cancer risk: a population-based study in Utah

INTRODUCTION

Pancreas adenocarcinoma (PC) has an undefined hereditary component. We quantified the familial risk of PC among relatives of patients diagnosed with PC and stratified it based on anatomic location of PC and age and sex of the proband.

METHODS

This is a retrospective, population-based, case-control study of PC diagnosed in Utah between 1980 and 2011. The Utah population database and cancer registry were used to identify index patients with PC. The risk of PC in first-degree relatives (FDRs), second-degree relatives (SDRs), and first cousins (FCs) of probands was compared with randomly selected sex- and age-matched population controls.

RESULTS

A total of 4,095 patients and 40,933 controls were identified. The relative risk (RR) of PC was 1.76 (95% CI 1.35-2.29) in FDRs, 1.42 (95% CI 1.18-1.7) in SDRs and 1.08 (95% CI 0.95-1.23) in FCs of probands compared to relatives of PC-free controls. The RR were elevated in FDRs (1.96, 95% CI 1.45-2.65), SDRs (1.54, 95% CI 1.19-1.98) and FCs (1.18, 95% CI 1.0-1.64) of female probands. Among probands diagnosed as < 65 years, RR was 2.12 (95% CI 1.37-3.28) in FDRs, 1.94 (95% CI 1.44-2.62) in SDRs, and 1.28 (95% CI 1.0-1.64) in FCs. Overall, the RR for PC was elevated in FDRs regardless of the anatomic location of PC.

DISCUSSION

There is an increased risk of PC in FDR and more distant relatives of patients with PC. Relatives of female patients with PC and patients diagnosed at age < 65 years are at a significantly increased risk of PC.

Pancreatic Cancer Surveillance: Who, When, and How

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Individuals who have an increased risk for pancreatic cancer (PC) due to personal or family history may benefit from surveillance of the pancreas to increase the likelihood of early detection. This review explores current indications for PC surveillance, as well as options for surveillance modality and timing, and data regarding surveillance outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recently published data suggests that individuals undergoing surveillance who develop PC are more likely to be diagnosed with resectable disease, which improves survival. Several professional organizations have published guidelines for surveillance to help define who should have surveillance, when surveillance should be performed, and how it can be accomplished. PC surveillance should be considered for individuals with a pathogenic variant in a PC-related gene who have an affected first- or second-degree relative and for individuals in a familial pancreatic cancer family who have an affected first-degree relative. Surveillance should begin at age 50, or 10 years before the earliest age of PC diagnosis in the family. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) or MRI/MRCP are both reasonable surveillance options, but EUS may be better at detecting small solid changes in the pancreas. Ideally, surveillance should be performed at expert centers in conjunction with research protocols.

Genetic counselling and personalised risk assessment in the Australian pancreatic cancer screening program

Background

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is an aggressive disease with a dismal 5-year survival rate. Surveillance of high-risk individuals is hoped to improve survival outcomes by detection of precursor lesions or early-stage malignancy.

Methods

Since 2011, a national high-risk cohort recruited through St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, has undergone prospective PC screening incorporating annual endoscopic ultrasound, formal genetic counselling and mutation analysis as appropriate. PancPRO, a Bayesian PC risk assessment model, was used to estimate 5-year and lifetime PC risks for familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) participants and this was compared to their perceived chance of pancreatic and other cancers. Genetic counselling guidelines were developed to improve consistency. Follow-up questionnaires were used to assess the role of genetic counselling and testing.

Results

We describe the Australian PC screening program design and recruitment strategy and the results of the first 102 individuals who have completed at least one-year of follow-up. Seventy-nine participants met the FPC criteria (≥ two first-degree relatives affected), 22 individuals had both a BRCA2 pathogenic variant and a close relative with PC and one had a clinical diagnosis of Peutz-Jeghers syndrome. Participants reported a high perceived chance of developing PC regardless of their genetic testing status. PancPRO reported FPC participants’ mean 5-year and lifetime PC risks as 1.81% (range 0.2–3.2%) and 10.17% (range 2.4–14.4%), respectively. Participants’ perceived PC chance did not correlate with their PancPRO 5-year (r = − 0.17, p = 0.128) and lifetime PC risks (r = 0.19, p = 0.091). Two-thirds felt that current genetic testing would help them, and 91% of tested participants were glad to have undergone genetic testing. Overall, 79% of participants found genetic counselling to be helpful, and 88% reported they would recommend counselling to their relatives.

Conclusions

Participants reported multiple benefits of genetic counselling and testing but continue to seek greater clarification about their individual PC risk. Extension of PancPRO is required to enable personalised PC risk assessment for all high-risk sub-groups. More detailed discussion of PC risk for BRCA2 pathogenic variant carriers, providing a written summary in all cases and a plan for genetics review were identified as areas for improvement.

The Role of BRCA Testing in Hereditary Pancreatic and Prostate Cancer Families

Beyond breast and ovarian cancers, mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes increase risks for pancreatic and prostate cancers and contribute to the prevalence of these cancers. Mutations in a number of other genes have also been shown to increase the risk for these cancers as well. Genetic testing is playing an increasingly important role in the treatment of patients with pancreatic and prostate cancer and is now recommended for all patients with pancreatic or metastatic prostate cancer, as well as patients with high Gleason grade prostate cancer and a remarkable family history. Identification of an inherited mutation can direct evaluation of the patient for other cancer risks as well as identification and management of disease in at-risk relatives. Growing evidence suggests improved responses to PARP inhibitors and other therapies in patients with mutations in the BRCA and other DNA repair genes. Although more work must be done to clarify the prevalence and penetrance of mutations in genes other than BRCA1 and BRCA2 in patients with pancreatic and prostate cancer, in most cases, testing is now being done with a panel of multiple genes. Because of the complexities in panel testing and the increased likelihood of finding variants of uncertain significance, pre- and post-test genetic counseling are essential.

Results of First-Round of Surveillance in Individuals at High-Risk of Pancreatic Cancer from the AISP (Italian Association for the Study of the Pancreas) Registry

INTRODUCTION

Surveillance programs on high-risk individuals (HRIs) can detect pre-malignant lesions or early pancreatic cancer (PC). We report the results of the first screening round of the Italian multicenter program supported by the Italian Association for the study of the Pancreas (AISP).

METHODS

The multicenter surveillance program included asymptomatic HRIs with familial (FPC) or genetic frailty (GS: BRCA1/2, p16/CDKN2A, STK11/LKB1or PRSS1, mutated genes) predisposition to PC. The surveillance program included at least an annual magnetic resonance cholangio pancreatography (MRCP). Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) was proposed to patients who refused or could not be submitted to MRCP.

RESULTS

One-hundreds eighty-seven HRIs underwent a first-round screening examination with MRCP (174; 93.1%) or EUS (13; 6.9%) from September 2015 to March 2018.The mean age was 51 years (range 21-80).One-hundreds sixty-five (88.2%) FPC and 22 (11.8%) GF HRIs were included. MRCP detected 28 (14.9%) presumed branch-duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMN), 1 invasive carcinoma/IPMN and one low-grade mixed-type IPMN, respectively. EUS detected 4 PC (2.1%): 1 was resected, 1 was found locally advanced intraoperatively, and 2 were metastatic. Age > 50 (OR 3.3, 95%CI 1.4-8), smoking habit (OR 2.8, 95%CI 1.1-7.5), and having > 2 relatives with PC (OR 2.7, 95%CI 1.1-6.4) were independently associated with detection of pre-malignant and malignant lesions. The diagnostic yield for MRCP/EUS was 24% for cystic lesions. The overall rate of surgery was 2.6% with nil mortality.

DISCUSSION

The rate of malignancies found in this cohort was high (2.6%). According to the International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening Consortium the screening goal achievement was high (1%).