Patient volume and clinical outcome after pancreatic cancer resection: A contemporary systematic review and meta-analysis

Have a vital end-user been overlooked? Developing a shared decision intervention for patients with potential pancreatic cancer regarding the choice of surgery

Objective

To develop a patient decision aid facilitating shared decision making for patients with potential pancreatic cancer deciding about no treatment, surgical or medical treatment.

Methods

Based on a user-centred design by Wittemann et al., we developed a shared decision making intervention in three phases: 1) Understanding decision needs 2) Development of a patient decision aid (PtDA) based on a generic template 3) Assessment of the intervention from interviews with patients (n = 11), relatives (n = 11), nurses (n = 4) and surgeons (n = 2) analysed with thematic analysis, and measuring patients' perceptions of choice of options with the Decisional Conflict Scale.

Results

Results showed varying experiences with the use of the PtDA, with surgeons not finding PtDA useful as it was impractical and constraining with patients' conversations. There was no difference in patients' perceptions in choosing options for those being presented vs those patients not being presented for the PtDA.

Conclusion

The format and structure of the PtDA was not feasible for the surgeons as fundamental users in the present clinic.

Innovation

This study highlights the urgent need to consider clinical context before introducing a predefined tool and shows the importance of a multistakeholder approach. Research should focus on finding means to successful implement shared decision making.

REDISCOVER International Guidelines on the Perioperative Care of Surgical Patients With Borderline-resectable and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVE

The REDISCOVER consensus conference aimed at developing and validating guidelines on the perioperative care of patients with borderline-resectable (BR-) and locally advanced (LA) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

BACKGROUND

Coupled with improvements in chemotherapy and radiation, the contemporary approach to pancreatic surgery supports the resection of BR-PDAC and, to a lesser extent, LA-PDAC. Guidelines outlining the selection and perioperative care for these patients are lacking.

METHODS

The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) methodology was used to develop the REDISCOVER guidelines and create recommendations. The Delphi approach was used to reach a consensus (agreement ≥80%) among experts. Recommendations were approved after a debate and vote among international experts in pancreatic surgery and pancreatic cancer management. A Validation Committee used the AGREE II-GRS tool to assess the methodological quality of the guidelines. Moreover, an independent multidisciplinary advisory group revised the statements to ensure adherence to nonsurgical guidelines.

RESULTS

Overall, 34 recommendations were created targeting centralization, training, staging, patient selection for surgery, possibility of surgery in uncommon scenarios, timing of surgery, avoidance of vascular reconstruction, details of vascular resection/reconstruction, arterial divestment, frozen section histology of perivascular tissue, extent of lymphadenectomy, anticoagulation prophylaxis, and role of minimally invasive surgery. The level of evidence was however low for 29 of 34 clinical questions. Participants agreed that the most conducive means to promptly advance our understanding in this field is to establish an international registry addressing this patient population ( https://rediscover.unipi.it/ ).

CONCLUSIONS

The REDISCOVER guidelines provide clinical recommendations pertaining to pancreatectomy with vascular resection for patients with BR-PDAC and LA-PDAC, and serve as the basis of a new international registry for this patient population.

Advances in Surgery and (Neo) Adjuvant Therapy in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer

A multimodality approach, which usually includes chemotherapy, surgery, and/or radiotherapy, is optimal for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. The timing and sequence of these interventions depend on anatomic resectability and the biological suitability of the tumor and the patient. Tumors with vascular involvement (ie, borderline resectable/locally advanced) require surgical reassessments after therapy and participation of surgeons familiar with advanced techniques. When indicated, venous reconstruction should be offered as standard of care because it has acceptable morbidity. Morbidity and mortality of pancreas surgery may be mitigated when surgery is performed at high-volume centers.

Nationwide Audit of Postoperative Mortality and Complications After Digestive Cancer Surgery: Will New Legal Thresholds be Sufficient?

BACKGROUND

French policymakers recently chose to regulate high-risk digestive cancer surgery (DCS). A minimum of five cases per year should be performed for each of the following types of curative cancer surgery: esophagus/esogastric junction (ECS), stomach (GCS), liver (LCS, metastasis included), pancreas (PCS), and rectum (RCS). This study aimed to evaluate the hypothetical beneficial effects of the new legal minimal volume thresholds on the rates of 90-day postoperative mortality (90POM) for each high-risk DCS.

METHODS

This nationwide observational population-based cohort study used data extracted from the French National Health Insurance Database from 1 January 2015-31 December 2017. Mixed-effects logistic regression models were performed to estimate the independent effect of hospital volume.

RESULTS

During the study period, 61,169 patients (57.1 % male, age 69.7 ±12.2 years) underwent high-risk DCS including ECS (n = 4060), GCS (n = 5572), PCS (n = 8598), LCS (n = 10,988), and RCS (n = 31,951), with 90POM of 6.6 %, 6.9 %, 6.0 %, 5.2 %, and 2.9 %, respectively. For hospitals fulfilling the new criteria, 90POM was lower after adjustment only for LCS (odds ratio [OR],15.2; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 9.5-23.2) vs OR, 7.6; 95 % CI, 5.2-11.0; p < 0.0001) and PCS (OR, 3.6; 95 % CI, 1.7-7.6 vs OR, 2.1; 95 % CI, 1.0-4.4; p<0.0001). With higher thresholds, all DCSs showed a lower adjusted risk of 90POM (e.g., OR, 0.38; 95 % CI, 0.28-0.51) for PCS of 40 or higher.

CONCLUSION

Based on retrospective data, thresholds higher than those promulgated would better improve the safety of high-risk DCS. New policies aiming to further centralize high-risk DCS should be considered, associated with a clear clinical pathway of care for patients to improve accessibility to complex health care in France.

Genetic Signature of Human Pancreatic Cancer and Personalized Targeting

Pancreatic cancer is a highly lethal disease with a 5-year survival rate of around 11-12%. Surgery, being the treatment of choice, is only possible in 20% of symptomatic patients. The main reason is that when it becomes symptomatic, IT IS the tumor is usually locally advanced and/or has metastasized to distant organs; thus, early diagnosis is infrequent. The lack of specific early symptoms is an important cause of late diagnosis. Unfortunately, diagnostic tumor markers become positive at a late stage, and there is a lack of early-stage markers. Surgical and non-surgical cases are treated with neoadjuvant and/or adjuvant chemotherapy, and the results are usually poor. However, personalized targeted therapy directed against tumor drivers may improve this situation. Until recently, many pancreatic tumor driver genes/proteins were considered untargetable. Chemical and physical characteristics of mutated KRAS are a formidable challenge to overcome. This situation is slowly changing. For the first time, there are candidate drugs that can target the main driver gene of pancreatic cancer: KRAS. Indeed, KRAS inhibition has been clinically achieved in lung cancer and, at the pre-clinical level, in pancreatic cancer as well. This will probably change the very poor outlook for this disease. This paper reviews the genetic characteristics of sporadic and hereditary predisposition to pancreatic cancer and the possibilities of a personalized treatment according to the genetic signature.

Distal Pancreatectomy: Extent of Resection Determines Surgical Risk Categories

BACKGROUND

Recently, subclassification of pancreatoduodenectomy in 4 differing types has been reported, because additional major vascular and multivisceral resections have been shown to be associated with an increased risk of postoperative morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE

To classify distal pancreatectomy (DP) based on the extent of resection and technical difficulty and to evaluate postoperative outcomes with regards to this classification system.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who had undergone DP between 2001 and 2020 in a high-volume pancreatic surgery center were included in this study. DPs were subclassified into 4 distinct categories reflecting the extent of resection and technical difficulty, including standard DP (type 1), DP with venous (type 2), multivisceral (type 3), or arterial resection (type 4). Patient characteristics, perioperative data, and postoperative outcomes were analyzed and compared among the 4 groups.

RESULTS

A total of 2135 patients underwent DP. Standard DP was the most frequently performed procedure (64.8%). The overall 90-day mortality rate was 1.6%. Morbidity rates were higher in patients with additional vascular or multivisceral resections, and 90-day mortality gradually increased with the extent of resection from standard DP to DP with arterial resection (type 1: 0.7%; type 2: 1.3%; type 3: 3%; type 4: 8.7%; P <0.0001). Multivariable analysis confirmed the type of DP as an independent risk factor for 90-day mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative outcomes after DP depend on the extent of resection and correlate with the type of DP. The implementation of the 4-type classification system allows standardized reporting of surgical outcomes after DP improving comparability of future studies.

Advances in the management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer remains among the malignancies with the worst outcomes. Survival has been improving, but at a slower rate than other cancers. Multimodal treatment, including chemotherapy, surgical resection, and radiotherapy, has been under investigation for many years. Because of the anatomical characteristics of the pancreas, more emphasis on treatment selection has been placed on local extension into major vessels. Recently, the development of more effective treatment regimens has opened up new treatment strategies, but urgent research questions have also become apparent. This review outlines the current management of pancreatic cancer, and the recent advances in its treatment. The review discusses future treatment pathways aimed at integrating novel findings of translational and clinical research.

Hospital volume and prognosis of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: A study using the Osaka Cancer Registry

PURPOSE

Pancreatic cancer (PC) has one of the worst prognoses among all solid cancers. Hospital volume has been shown to be significantly associated with outcomes in patients with PC undergoing surgery. Nonetheless, the association between hospital volume and prognosis in patients with metastatic PC remains unclear. This study aimed to examine the association between hospital volume and prognosis in patients with metastatic PC using large-scale population-based cancer registry data.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study was conducted using data from the Osaka Cancer Registry database. Data of patients with metastatic PC over 10 years (2009-2018) were obtained. Hospitals were categorized into high-volume hospitals (HVHs; ≥ 240 patients diagnosed with PC for 10 years), middle-volume hospitals (MVHs; 120-239 patients diagnosed with PC for 10 years), and low-volume hospitals (LVHs; < 120 patients diagnosed with PC for 10 years). Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors associated with overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

The analysis included 8,929 patients with metastatic PC. Median OS was significantly more favorable in HVHs than in MVHs and LVHs. Multivariate analysis adjusted for hospital volume, age, primary tumor site, year of diagnosis, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy revealed that hospital volume was an independent factor associated with OS (HVHs vs. MVHs: hazard ratio [HR], 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.16; P = 0.003, HVHs vs. LVHs: HR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.13-1.27; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Hospital volume is an independent prognostic factor in patients with metastatic PC, suggesting an association between hospital volume and treatment outcomes.

Volume- and quality-controlled certification system promotes centralization of complex hepato-pancreatic-biliary surgery

BACKGROUND

Centralization of complex surgeries has made little progress when it only considers the minimum number of surgical procedures. We aim to assess the impact of certification system of Japanese Society of Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic Surgery (JSHBPS) on centralization and surgical quality of advanced hepato-pancreatic-biliary (HPB) surgery.

METHODS

The National Clinical Database was used to review 20 111 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and 9666 who underwent advanced hepatectomy defined as hepatectomy of more than one section during 2019 and 2020. JSHPBS certifies hospitals based on the annual number of advanced HPB surgeries and the surgical quality. Minimum numbers of surgeries for board-certified A and B institutions are 50 and 30, respectively. Short-term outcomes were compared among institutions.

RESULTS

In 2020, 69.4% (7007/10090) and 72.9% (3433/4710) of patients underwent PD and advanced hepatectomy at board-certified institutions. In-hospital mortality rates after PD was 0.9% at certified A institutions, 1.4% at B institutions, and 2.7% at non-certified institutions (p < .001). The odds ratio (OR) of risk-adjusted mortality after PD compared with non-certified institutions was 0.39 (confidence interval [CI]: 0.30-0.50, p < .001) at certified A institutions, and 0.54 at certified B institutions (CI: 0.40-0.73, p < .001). In-hospital mortality rates after advanced hepatectomy was 1.7% at certified A institutions, 2.3% at B institutions, and 3.2% at non-certified institutions (p < .001). The OR of risk-adjusted mortality after advanced hepatectomy compared with non-certified institutions was 0.57 at certified A institutions (CI: 0.41-0.78, p < .001).

CONCLUSION

The volume- and quality-controlled certification system of JSHBPS reduces surgical mortality after advanced HPB surgeries.

International consensus recommendations for the optimal prioritisation and distribution of surgical services in low-income and middle-income countries: a modified Delphi process

OBJECTIVES

To develop consensus statements regarding the regional-level or district-level distribution of surgical services in low and middle-income countries (LMICs) and prioritisation of service scale-up.

DESIGN

This work was conducted using a modified Delphi consensus process. Initial statements were developed by the International Standards and Guidelines for Quality Safe Surgery and Anesthesia Working Group of the Global Alliance for Surgical, Obstetric, Trauma and Anesthesia Care (G4 Alliance) and the International Society of Surgery based on previously published literature and clinical expertise. The Guidance on Conducting and REporting DElphi Studies framework was applied.

SETTING

The Working Group convened in Suva, Fiji for a meeting hosted by the Ministry of Health and Medical Services to develop the initial statements. Local experts were invited to participate. The modified Delphi process was conducted through an electronically administered anonymised survey.

PARTICIPANTS

Expert LMIC surgeons were nominated for participation in the modified Delphi process based on criteria developed by the Working Group.

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The consensus panel voted on statements regarding the organisation of surgical services, principles for scale-up and prioritisation of scale-up. Statements reached consensus if there was ≥80% agreement among participants.

RESULTS

Fifty-three nominated experts from 27 LMICs voted on 27 statements in two rounds. Ultimately, 26 statements reached consensus and comprise the current recommendations. The statements covered three major themes: which surgical services should be decentralised or regionalised; how the implementation of these services should be prioritised; and principles to guide LMIC governments and international visiting teams in scaling up safe, accessible and affordable surgical care.

CONCLUSIONS

These recommendations represent the first step towards the development of international guidelines for the scaling up of surgical services in LMICs. They constitute the best available basis for policymaking, planning and allocation of resources for strengthening surgical systems.

Chronological improvement of pancreatectomy for resectable but advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms

BACKGROUND

Progress of non-surgical treatments in the last decade has improved the prognosis of pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (PanNEN). However, the improvement of surgery for advanced PanNEN remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the chronological changes of the clinical impact of pancreatectomy for PanNEN.

METHODS

Patients undergoing curative-intent pancreatectomy for PanNEN between 1991 and 2010 were categorized into the earlier period group, and those between 2011 and 2021 were into the later period group. Advanced PanNEN was defined as showing resectable synchronous liver metastases or invasion to portal venous systems or adjacent organs. The recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were analyzed among patients with non-advanced and advanced PanNENs. The independent prognostic risk factors were identified using a Cox proportional hazard model.

RESULTS

A total of 189 patients (n = 54 in the earlier period and n = 135 in the later period) were included. The proportion of advanced PanNEN increased from 15% to 30% (P = 0.027). The RFS and OS of non-advanced PanNEN were similar between the periods. Whereas, among patients with advanced PanNEN, the later period group showed improved prognosis; The 5-year RFS of the earlier period vs. the later period was 0% vs. 27%, and the 5-year OS was 38% vs. 82% (p = 0.013).

CONCLUSIONS

A radical surgical treatment for advanced PanNEN has shown prognostic improvement in this decade. However, more careful perioperative examinations and possibly, additional treatments are required for PanNEN with portal vein invasion.

Average treatment effect of facility hepatopancreatobiliary cancer volume on survival of non-resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

To examine the average treatment effect of hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) cancer volume on survival outcomes of patients with non-resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database (2004-2018) for patients with HPB malignancies (PDAC, pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms, hepatocellular carcinoma, biliary tract cancers). We determined the 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles based on the total annual HPB volume. We then identified patients with non-resected PDAC. We utilized inverse probability (IP)-weighted Cox regression to estimate the effect of facility volume on overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

We identified 710,988 patients with HPB malignancies. The 25th, 50th, and 75th percentiles of total annual HPB volume were 32, 71, and 177 cases/year, respectively. We included a total of 196,150 patients with non-resected PDAC. Patients treated at ≥25th, ≥50th, and ≥75th percentile facilities had improved median OS compared to those treated at facilities below these thresholds (5.8 vs. 4.2months, 6.5 vs. 4.5months, 7.5 vs. 4.8months, respectively; p < 0.001 for all). Treatment at facilities ≥25th, ≥50th, and ≥75th percentile resulted in lower hazards of death than treatment at lower-percentile facilities (HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.84-0.90; HR: 0.87, 95% CI: 0.83-0.91; HR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.79-0.91, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that consolidation of care of patients with PDAC to high-volume centers may be beneficial even in the nonoperative setting.

Pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumor: Rationale for Centralization in an Integrated Health Care System

OBJECTIVES

Given the complex surgical management and infrequency of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor, we hypothesized that treatment at a center of excellence improves survival.

METHODS

Retrospective review identified 354 patients with pancreatic neuroendocrine tumor treated between 2010 and 2018. Four hepatopancreatobiliary centers of excellence were created from 21 hospitals throughout Northern California. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. The χ2 test of clinicopathologic factors determined which were predictive for overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Localized disease was seen in 51% of patients, and metastatic disease was seen in 32% of patients with mean OS of 93 and 37 months, respectively (P < 0.001). On multivariate survival analysis, stage, tumor location, and surgical resection were significant for OS (P < 0.001). All stage OS for patients treated at designated centers was 80 and 60 months for noncenters (P < 0.001). Surgery was more common across stages at the centers of excellence versus noncenters at 70% and 40%, respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors are indolent but have malignant potential at any size with management often requiring complex surgeries. We showed survival was improved for patients treated at a center of excellence, where surgery was more frequently utilized.

Effect of Centralization on Surgical Outcome of Children Operated for Liver Tumors in Switzerland: A Retrospective Comparative Study

Background: Pediatric liver surgery is complex, and complications are not uncommon. Centralization of highly specialized surgery has been shown to improve quality of care. In 2012, pediatric liver surgery was centralized in Switzerland in one national center. This study analyses results before and after centralization. Methods: Retrospective monocentric comparative study. Analysis of medical records of children (0–16 years) operated for any liver tumor between 1 January 2001 and 31 December 2020. Forty-one patients were included: 14 before centralization (before 1 January 2012) and 27 after centralization (after 1 January 2012). Epidemiological, pre-, intra-, and post-operative data were collected. Fischer’s exact and t-test were used to compare groups. Results: The two cohorts were homogeneous. Operating time was reduced, although not significantly, from 366 to 277 min. Length of postoperative stay and mortality were not statistically different between groups. Yet, after centralization, overall postoperative complication rate decreased significantly from 57% to 15% (p = 0.01), Clavien > III complications decreased from 50% to 7% (p < 0.01), and hepatic recurrences were also significantly reduced (40% to 5%, p = 0.03). Conclusion: Centralization of the surgical management of liver tumors in Switzerland has improved quality of care in our center by significantly reducing postoperative complications and hepatic recurrence.