Update on the management of older patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a perspective from medical oncology

In the context of pancreatic cancer, surgical intervention is typically recommended for localized tumours, whereas chemotherapy is the preferred approach in the advanced and/or metastatic setting. However, pancreatic cancer is closely linked to ageing, with an average diagnosis at 72 years. Paradoxically, despite its increased occurrence among older individuals, this population is often underrepresented in clinical studies, complicating the decision-making process. Age alone should not determine the therapeutic strategy but, given the high comorbidity and mortality of this disease, a comprehensive geriatric assessment (CGA) is necessary to define the best treatment, prevent toxicity, and optimize older patient care. In this review, a group of experts from the Oncogeriatrics Section of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (Sociedad Española de Oncología Médica, SEOM), the Spanish Cooperative Group for the Treatment of Digestive Tumours (Grupo Español de Tratamiento de los Tumores Digestivos, TTD), and the Multidisciplinary Spanish Group of Digestive Cancer (Grupo Español Multidisciplinar en Cáncer Digestivo, GEMCAD) have assessed the available scientific evidence and propose a series of recommendations on the management and treatment of the older population with pancreatic cancer.

Ablative Radiotherapy (ART) for Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer (LAPC): Toward a New Paradigm?

Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) represents a major urgency in oncology. Due to the massive involvement of the peripancreatic vessels, a curative-intent surgery is generally precluded. Historically, LAPC has been an indication for palliative systemic therapy. In recent years, with the introduction of intensive multi-agent chemotherapy regimens and aggressive surgical approaches, the survival of LAPC patients has significantly improved. In this complex and rapidly evolving scenario, the role of radiotherapy is still debated. The use of standard-dose conventional fractionated radiotherapy in LAPC has led to unsatisfactory oncological outcomes. However, technological advances in radiation therapy over recent years have definitively changed this paradigm. The use of ablative doses of radiotherapy, in association with image-guidance, respiratory organ-motion management, and adaptive protocols, has led to unprecedented results in terms of local control and survival. In this overview, principles, clinical applications, and current pitfalls of ablative radiotherapy (ART) as an emerging treatment option for LAPC are discussed.

The Utility of Stereotactic Ablative Radiation Therapy for Palliation of Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Our purpose was to report the outcome of stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) to the primary tumor for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We examined the records of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with SABR to the primary tumor between 2002 and 2018. Toxicities were graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events Version 4.03. Pain intensity pre- and post-SABR was scored according to the Stanford Pain Scale as reported by the patient. Time-to-events were calculated from the date of end of SABR delivery.

RESULTS

In total, 27 patients were identified that met the inclusion criteria. Seventeen (63%) patients received single fraction SABR with a median dose of 25 Gy (range, 12.5-25), and 10 (37%) patients were treated in 5 fractions with a median dose of 33 Gy (range, 25-40). Before the start of SABR, 17 (63%) patients reported having abdominal pain, with a median intensity of 5 in the 0 to 10 pain scale (range, 1-9), 11 (41%) of them needing continuous opioid use. The median follow-up was 6 months (range, 0-18). Median overall survival was 7 months (95% confidence interval, 3-10), with a cumulative incidence of local failures at 1 year of 25% (95% confidence interval, 10-44). After SABR, there was a significant reduction in the mean intensity of pain (P = .01), and a 46% relative reduction in continuous opioid use. Only 2 patients (7%) presented a grade 3 toxicity that could be attributed to treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In this small series, SABR was a safe and effective option for the local palliation of metastatic pancreatic cancer, with measurable improvements in abdominal pain and the need for opioids.

Pain Relief with Short Term Irradiation in Locally Advanced Carcinoma of the Pancreas

Objectives

To evaluate whether a short radiation treatment (30 Gy, 3.0 Gy/fraction) had analgesic efficacy in patients with unresectable pancreatic carcinoma.

Methods

Twelve patients were included in this analysis. Before starting and at four weeks after radiation therapy, pain intensity was evaluated and analgesic drug therapy was adjusted until a 0–3 pain score was reached (WHO).

Results

No radiotherapy interruptions, no hospitalisation due to toxic reactions, and no severe toxicity were observed. Six patients (50%) had pain control without pharmacological therapy, three patients (25%) reduced their use (35%–72%) of analgesics, while in the remaining three patients (25%) there was no change in analgesic use. Overall, mean reduction in the use of analgesics was 63.1% ± 43.8%. During follow-up (44 months), two patients (16.7%) showed a worsening of pain that required increased analgesia; in one patient, percutaneous splanchnicectomy was necessary.

Conclusion

In patients excluded from standard concomitant chemoradiation, hypofractionated-accelerated radiotherapy is feasible and results in pain relief in most patients, documented as a reduced need for analgesics.

Pain in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: A multidisciplinary, International guideline for optimized management

Abdominal pain is an important symptom in most patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Adequate control of pain is often unsatisfactory due to limited treatment options and significant variation in local practice, emphasizing the need for a multidisciplinary approach. This review contends that improvement in the management of PDAC pain will result from a synthesis of best practice and evidence around the world in a multidisciplinary way. To improve clinical utility and evaluation, the evidence was rated according to the GRADE guidelines by a group of international experts. An algorithm is presented, which brings together all currently available treatment options. Pain is best treated early on with analgesics with most patients requiring opioids, but neurolytic procedures are often required later in the disease course. Celiac plexus neurolysis offers medium term relief in a substantial number of patients, but other procedures such as splanchnicectomy are also available. Palliative chemotherapy also provides pain relief as a collateral benefit. It is stressed that the assessment of pain must take into account the broader context of other physical and psychological symptoms. Adjunctive treatments for pain, depression and anxiety as well as radiotherapy, endoscopic therapy and neuromodulation may be required in selected patients. There are few comparative studies to help define which combination and order of these treatment options should be applied. New pain therapies are emerging and could for example target neural transmitters. However, until better methods are available, management of pain should be individualized in a multidisciplinary setting to ensure optimal care.

Cost-effectiveness of palliative surgery versus nonsurgical procedures in gastrointestinal cancer patients

Palliative care is an essential component to multidisciplinary cancer care. Improved symptom control, quality of life (QOL), and survival have resulted from its utilization. Cost-effectiveness and utility analyses are significant variables that should be considered in comparing benefits and costs of medical interventions to determine if certain treatments are economically justified. This is a review on the cost-effectiveness of palliative surgery compared to other nonsurgical palliative procedures in patients with unresectable gastrointestinal cancers. J. Surg. Oncol. 2016;114:316-322. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

An analysis of cost and clinical outcome in palliation for advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The optimal palliative method for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review evaluated patients who underwent exploration for presumed resectable pancreatic cancer. Cost-based analysis was performed using relative value units (RVUs) that included the initial surgical procedure and any additional procedure required to achieve satisfactory palliation.

RESULTS

Of 96 patients (1993--2002), 6% had biliary bypass, 42% had duodenal bypass, 40% had double bypass, and 13% had no procedure with equivalent clinical outcomes. If biliary bypass was not initially performed, there was a significant incidence of biliary complications before definitive endoscopic stenting (P=.01). If duodenal bypass was not initially performed, 11% developed duodenal obstruction (P=.04). Total RVUs was highest for a double bypass and lowest for no initial surgical palliative procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Although surgical bypass procedures at initial exploration provide durable palliation, these procedures are associated with greater costs.

The need for a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy for unresectable periampullary cancer: a prospective randomized multicenter trial with special focus on assessment of quality of life

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy on the development of gastric outlet obstruction and quality of life in patients with unresectable periampullary cancer found during explorative laparotomy.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Several studies, including one randomized trial, propagate to perform a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy routinely in patients with periampullary cancer found to be unresectable during laparotomy. Others suggest an increase of postoperative complications. Controversy still exists in general surgical practice if a double bypass should be performed routinely in these patients.

METHODS

Between December 1998 and March 2002, patients with a periampullary carcinoma who were found to be unresectable during exploration were randomized to receive a double bypass (hepaticojejunostomy and a retrocolic gastrojejunostomy) or a single bypass (hepaticojejunostomy). Randomization was stratified for center and presence of metastases. Patients with gastrointestinal obstruction and patients treated endoscopically for more than 3 months were excluded. Primary endpoints were development of clinical gastric outlet obstruction and surgical intervention for gastric outlet obstruction. Secondary endpoints were mortality, morbidity, hospital stay, survival, and quality of life, measured prospectively by the EORTC-C30 and Pan26 questionnaires. It was decided to perform an interim analysis after inclusion of 50% of the patients (n = 70).

RESULTS

Five of the 70 patients randomized were lost to follow-up. From the remaining 65 patients, 36 patients underwent a double and 29 a single bypass. There were no differences in patient demographics, preoperative symptoms, and surgical findings between the groups. Clinical symptoms of gastric outlet obstruction were found in 2 of the 36 patients (5.5%) with a double bypass, and in 12 of the 29 patients (41.4%) with a single bypass (P = 0.001). In the double bypass group, one patient (2.8%) and in the single bypass group 6 patients (20.7%) required (re-)gastrojejunostomy during follow-up (P = 0.04). The absolute risk reduction for reoperation in the double bypass group was 18%, and the numbers needed to treat was 6. Postoperative morbidity rates, including delayed gastric emptying, were 31% in the double versus 28% in the single bypass group (P = 0.12). Median postoperative length of stay was 11 days (range 4-76 days) in the double versus 9 days (range 6-20 days) in the single bypass group (P = 0.06); median survival was 7.2 months in the double versus 8.4 months in the single bypass group (P = 0.15). No differences were found in the quality of life between both groups. After surgery most quality of life scores deteriorated temporarily and were restored to their baseline score (t = -1) within 4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic gastrojejunostomy significantly decreases the incidence of gastric outlet obstruction without increasing complication rates. There were no differences in quality of life between the two groups. Together with the previous randomized trial from the Hopkins group, this study provides sufficient evidence to state that a double bypass consisting of a hepaticojejunostomy and a prophylactic gastrojejunostomy is preferable to a single bypass consisting of only a hepaticojejunostomy in patients undergoing surgical palliation for unresectable periampullary carcinoma. Therefore, the trial was stopped earlier than planned.

Endoscopic treatment of pancreatico-biliary malignancies

Biliary obstructions, due to pancreatic cancer and cholangiocarcinoma, have an ominous prognosis. At the time of diagnosis, most patients are beyond any curative treatment. Palliative therapies, such as transhepatic biliary drainage, bypass surgery, and endoscopy, have an established role in the management of such patients. Endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography (ERCP) plays a key role, allowing diagnosis, collection of cytologic and bioptic specimens, and insertion of large-bore biliary stents. The major drawback of plastic stents is the high rate of clogging, requiring frequent stent exchange. In the 1990s, self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) were developed and randomized studies have shown their superiority over plastic stents. SEMS can be successfully used in patients with hilar tumors. Duodenal obstruction due to biliopancreatic neoplasms can also be managed endoscopically. ERCP can be performed on an outpatient basis in selected patients, reducing costs related to hospitalization. A team approach is mandatory to obtain the best results.