Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A New Standard of Care. Pooled Data From 3 Randomized Controlled Trials

Preoperative Prediction of Long-Term Survival After Surgery in Patients with Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Although some clinical trials have demonstrated the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), its optimal candidate has not been clarified. This study aimed to detect predictive prognostic factors for resectable PDAC patients who underwent upfront surgery and identify patient cohorts with long-term survival without neoadjuvant therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 232 patients with resectable PDAC who underwent upfront surgery between January 2008 and December 2019 were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median overall survival (OS) time and 5-year OS rate of resectable PDAC with upfront surgery was 31.5 months and 33.3%, respectively. Multivariate analyses identified tumor diameter in computed tomography (CT) ≤ 19 mm [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, p < 0.001], span-1 within the normal range (HR 0.54, p = 0.023), prognostic nutritional index (PNI) ≥ 44.31 (HR 0.51, p < 0.001), and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratio (LMR) ≥ 3.79 (HR 0.51, p < 0.001) as prognostic factors that influence favorable prognoses after upfront surgery. According to the prognostic prediction model based on these four factors, patients with four favorable prognostic factors had a better prognosis with a 5-year OS rate of 82.4% compared to others (p < 0.001). These patients had a high R0 resection rate and a low frequency of tumor recurrence after upfront surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified patients with long-term survival after upfront surgery by prognostic prediction model consisting of tumor diameter in CT, span-1, PNI, and LMR. Evaluation of anatomical, biological, nutritional, and inflammatory factors may be valuable to introduce an optimal treatment strategy for resectable PDAC.

Neoadjuvant therapy for localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly aggressive tumor with poor prognosis and rising incidence globally. Multimodal therapy that includes surgical resection and chemotherapy with or without radiation offers the best chance for optimal outcomes. The development of established criteria for anatomic staging of local primary tumors into potentially resectable (PR), borderline resectable (BR), and locally advanced (LA) has greatly clarified the optimal treatment strategies. While upfront surgical resection was traditionally the recommended approach for localized PDAC, increasingly neoadjuvant therapy (NT) is recommended prior to surgery. Whereas NT can lead to downstaging that facilitates surgical resection for BR/LA cancers, NT also enhances patient selection for surgery, improves margin-negative resection rates, and increases the odds of completing multimodality therapy for all patients with PDAC. Herein, we review the rationale for NT for localized PDAC and summarize existing and ongoing literature.

Neoadjuvant and adjuvant systemic therapy in HCC: Current status and the future

Surgical therapies in patients with early-stage HCC can afford long-term survival but are often limited by the continued risk of recurrence, underscoring an interest in (neo)adjuvant strategies. Prior attempts at adjuvant therapy using tyrosine kinase inhibitors failed to yield significant improvements in recurrence-free survival or overall survival. Advances in the efficacy of systemic therapy options, including the introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors, have fueled renewed interest in this area. Indeed, the IMBrave050 trial recently demonstrated significant improvements in recurrence-free survival with 1 year of adjuvant atezolizumab plus bevacizumab in high-risk patients undergoing surgical resection or ablation, with several other ongoing trials in this space. There is a strong rationale for consideration of the administration of these therapies in the neoadjuvant setting, supported by early clinical data demonstrating high rates of objective responses, although larger trials examining downstream outcomes are necessary, particularly considering the possible risks of this strategy. In parallel, there has been increased interest in using systemic therapies as a bridging or downstaging strategy for liver transplantation. Current data suggest the short-term safety of this approach, with acceptable rates of rejection, so immunotherapy is not considered a contraindication to transplant; however, larger studies are needed to evaluate the incremental value of this approach over locoregional therapy. Conversely, the use of immunotherapy is currently discouraged after liver transplantation, given the high risk of graft rejection and death. The increasing complexity of HCC management and increased consideration of (neo)adjuvant strategies highlight the critical role of multidisciplinary care when making these decisions.

Adjuvant Gemcitabine Versus Neoadjuvant/Adjuvant FOLFIRINOX in Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: The Randomized Multicenter Phase II NEPAFOX Trial

BACKGROUND

Although addition of adjuvant chemotherapy is the current standard, the prognosis of pancreatic cancers still remains poor. The NEPAFOX trial evaluated perioperative treatment with FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This multicenter phase II trial randomized patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer without metastases into arm (A,) upfront surgery plus adjuvant gemcitabine, or arm (B,) perioperative FOLFIRINOX. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Owing to poor accrual, recruitment was prematurely stopped after randomization of 40 of the planned 126 patients (A: 21, B: 19). Overall, approximately three-quarters were classified as primarily resectable (A: 16, B: 15), and the remaining patients were classified as borderline resectable (A: 5, B: 4). Of the 12 evaluable patients, 3 achieved partial response under neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Of the 21 patients in arm A and 19 patients in arm B, 17 and 7 underwent curative surgery, and R0-resection was achieved in 77% and 71%, respectively. Perioperative morbidity occurred in 72% in arm A and 46% in arm B, whereas non-surgical toxicity was comparable in both arms. Median RFS/PFS was almost doubled in arm B (14.1 months) compared with arm A (8.4 months) in the population with surgical resection, whereas median OS was comparable between both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the analysis was only descriptive owing to small patient numbers, no safety issues regarding surgical complications were observed in the perioperative FOLFIRINOX arm. Thus, considering the small number of patients, perioperative treatment approach appears feasible and potentially effective in well-selected cohorts of patients. In pancreatic cancer, patient selection before initiation of neoadjuvant therapy appears to be critical.

Imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - An update for all stages of patient management

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a common and lethal cancer. From diagnosis to disease staging, response to neoadjuvant therapy assessment and patient surveillance after resection, imaging plays a central role, guiding the multidisciplinary team in decision-planning.

Review aims and findings

This review discusses the most up-to-date imaging recommendations, typical and atypical findings, and issues related to each step of patient management. Example cases for each relevant condition are presented, and a structured report for disease staging is suggested.

Conclusion

Despite current issues in PDAC imaging at different stages of patient management, the radiologist is essential in the multidisciplinary team, as the conveyor of relevant imaging findings crucial for patient care.

KRT81 and HNF1A expression in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: investigation of predictive and prognostic value of immunohistochemistry-based subtyping

Even after decades of research, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a highly lethal disease and responses to conventional treatments remain mostly poor. Subclassification of PDAC into distinct biological subtypes has been proposed by various groups to further improve patient outcome and reduce unnecessary side effects. Recently, an immunohistochemistry (IHC)-based subtyping method using cytokeratin-81 (KRT81) and hepatocyte nuclear factor 1A (HNF1A) could recapitulate some of the previously established molecular subtyping methods, while providing significant prognostic and, to a limited degree, also predictive information. We refined the KRT81/HNF1A subtyping method to classify PDAC into three distinct biological subtypes. The prognostic value of the IHC-based method was investigated in two primary resected cohorts, which include 269 and 286 patients, respectively. In the second cohort, we also assessed the predictive effect for response to erlotinib + gemcitabine. In both PDAC cohorts, the new HNF1A-positive subtype was associated with the best survival, the KRT81-positive subtype with the worst, and the double-negative with an intermediate survival (p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively) in univariate and multivariate analyses. In the second cohort (CONKO-005), the IHC-based subtype was additionally found to have a potential predictive value for the erlotinib-based treatment effect. The revised IHC-based subtyping using KRT81 and HNF1A has prognostic significance for PDAC patients and may be of value in predicting treatment response to specific therapeutic agents.

Endoscopic Gallbladder Drainage: A Comprehensive Review on Indications, Techniques, and Future Perspectives

In recent years, therapeutic endoscopy has become a fundamental tool in the management of gallbladder diseases in light of its minimal invasiveness, high clinical efficacy, and good safety profile. Both endoscopic transpapillary gallbladder drainage (TGBD) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) provide effective internal drainage in patients with acute cholecystitis unfit for cholecystectomy, avoiding the drawbacks of external percutaneous gallbladder drainage (PGBD). The availability of dedicated lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMS) for EUS-guided transluminal interventions contributed to the expansion of endoscopic therapies for acute cholecystitis, making endoscopic gallbladder drainage easier, faster, and hence more widely available. Moreover, EUS-GBD with LAMS opened the possibility of several cholecystoscopy-guided interventions, such as gallstone lithotripsy and clearance. Finally, EUS-GBD has also been proposed as a rescue drainage modality in malignant biliary obstruction after failure of standard techniques, with encouraging results. In this review, we will describe the TBGD and EUS-GBD techniques, and we will discuss the available data on clinical efficacy in different settings in comparison with PGBD. Finally, we will comment on the future perspectives of EUS-GBD, discussing the areas of uncertainty in which new data are more strongly awaited.

Cholangitis and Interruptions of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Associate with Reduced Overall and Progression-Free Survival in Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Interrupting chemotherapy may explain the reduced overall survival (OS) in patients with pancreatic cancer (PC) with cholangitis. Endoscopic biliary decompression (BD) with metallic stents results in fewer chemotherapy interruptions and a lower cholangitis rate compared with plastic stents. We aimed to determine the impact of cholangitis, neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) interruptions and biliary stent choice on PC patients' survival.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis of 162 patients with cancer of the head of the pancreas undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy after NAT and BD documenting progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. Data on BD, cholangitis, stent type, surgical radicality, and chemotherapy were collected. Survival was estimated based on the Kaplan-Meier method by using the log-rank test and multivariate Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Median OS and PFS for patients with cholangitis (n = 33, 20%) were 26 and 8 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 20-32 and 5-10 months), respectively, compared with 36 and 17 months (95% CI 31-41 and 12-21 months; p < 0.001 for OS; p = 0.002 for PFS) for patients without cholangitis. Among patients without NAT interruptions median OS and PFS were 35 and 17 months (95% CI 31-40 and 12-21 months), falling to 26 and 7 months (95% CI 18-30 and 5-10 months) among those who experienced an NAT interruption caused by biliary stent failure (n = 26, 16%) (p = 0.039 for OS; p < 0.001 for PFS). We found no difference in OS or PFS between stent types.

CONCLUSIONS

Cholangitis and NAT interruptions reduce OS and PFS among PC patients.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines

For patients with locoregionally confined pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), margin-negative surgical resection is the only known curative treatment; however, the majority of patients are not operable candidates at initial diagnosis. Among patients with resectable disease who undergo surgery alone, the 5-year survival remains poor. Adjuvant therapies, including systemic therapy or chemoradiation, are utilized as they improve locoregional control and overall survival. There has been increasing interest in the use of neoadjuvant therapy to obtain early control of occult metastatic disease, allow local tumor response to facilitate margin-negative resection, and provide a test of time and biology to assist with the selection of candidates most likely to benefit from radical surgical resection. However, limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options. In this systematic review, the American Radium Society multidisciplinary gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria evaluating the evidence regarding neoadjuvant treatment for patients with PDAC, including surgery, systemic therapy, and radiotherapy, in terms of oncologic outcomes and quality of life. The evidence was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design framework and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included phases 2 to 3 trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2012 and December 30, 2022 in the Ovid Medline database. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined to guide practitioners in the management of patients with PDAC.

The Revised R Status is an Independent Predictor of Postresection Survival in Pancreatic Cancer After Neoadjuvant Treatment

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the oncological outcomes of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who had an R 0 or R 1 resection based on the revised R status (1 mm) after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT).

BACKGROUND

The revised R status is an independent prognostic factor in upfront-resected PDAC; however, the significance of 1 mm margin clearance after NAT remains controversial.

METHODS

Patients undergoing pancreatectomy after NAT for PDAC were identified from 2 prospectively maintained databases. Clinicopathological and survival data were analyzed. The primary outcomes were overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and pattern of recurrence in association with R 0 >1 mm and R 1 ≤1 mm resections.

RESULTS

Three hundred fifty-seven patients with PDAC were included after NAT and subsequent pancreatic resection. Two hundred eight patients (58.3%) received FOLFIRINOX, 41 patients (11.5%) received gemcitabine-based regimens, and 299 individuals (83.8%) received additional radiotherapy. R 0 resections were achieved in 272 patients (76.2%) and 85 patients (23.8%) had R 1 resections. Median OS after R 0 was 41.0 months, compared with 20.6 months after R 1 resection ( P = 0.002), and even longer after additional adjuvant chemotherapy ( R 0 44.8 vs R1 20.1 months; P = 0.0032). Median RFS in the R 0 subgroup was 17.5 months versus 9.4 months in the R 1 subgroup ( P < 0.0001). R status was confirmed as an independent predictor for OS ( R 1 hazard ratio: 1.56, 95% CI: 1.07-2.26) and RFS ( R 1 hazard ratio: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.14-2.0). In addition, R 1 resections were significantly associated with local but not distant recurrence ( P < 0.0005).

CONCLUSIONS

The revised R status is an independent predictor of postresection survival and local recurrence in PDAC after NAT. Achieving R 0 resection with a margin of at least 1 mm should be a primary goal in the surgical treatment of PDAC after NAT.

The prognosis-based classification model in resectable pancreatic cancer

AIM

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treatment is mainly based on the anatomical resectability classification. However, prognosis-based classification may be more reasonable. In this study, we stratified resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma according to preoperative factors and reconsidered treatment strategies.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 131 patients who underwent upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2019. Recurrence within 1 year after surgery was defined as early recurrence, and the risk factors for early recurrence were identified using preoperative factors. Subsequently, we calculated the scores and stratified the participant groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-five (42 %) patients who relapsed within 1 year showed significantly poorer survival than those without recurrence (median overall survival, 14.0 vs. 80.6 months; p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that a tumor diameter of ≥24 mm (p < 0.01) and preoperative serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level of ≥380 U/mL (p = 0.04) were the independent risk factors for early recurrence. Early recurrence score was created using these factors, stratifying the participant group into three groups of 0-2 points, and the prognosis was significantly different (median overall survival, 49.3 vs. 31.2 vs. 16.0 months; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

We stratified the upfront surgical cases of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The group with a score of 0 had a good prognosis, and upfront surgery was possibly not futile on patients in poor general condition. The group with a score of 2 had a poor prognosis and may require stronger preoperative treatment.

Minimally invasive versus open radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: an entropy balancing analysis

BACKGROUND

The safety and efficacy of minimally invasive radical antegrade modular pancreatosplenectomy (MI-RAMPS) remain to be established in pancreatic cancer (PDAC) METHODS: Eighty-five open (O)-RAMPS were compared to 93 MI-RAMPS. The entropy balance matching approach was used to compare the two cohorts, eliminating the selection bias. Three models were created. Model 1 made O-RAMPS equal to the MI-RAMPS cohort (i.e., compared the two procedures for resectable PDAC); model 2 made MI-RAMPS equal to O-RAMPS (i.e., compared the two procedures for borderline-resectable PDAC); model 3, compared robotic and laparoscopic RAMPS.

RESULTS

O-RAMPS and MI-RAMPS showed "non-small" differences for BMI, comorbidity, back pain, tumor size, vascular resection, anterior or posterior RAMPS, multi-visceral resection, stump management, grading, and neoadjuvant therapy. Before reweighting, O-RAMPS had fewer clinically relevant postoperative pancreatic fistulae (CR-POPF) (20.0% vs. 40.9%; p = 0.003), while MI-RAMPS had a higher mean of lymph nodes (25.7 vs. 31.7; p = 0.011). In model 1, MI-RAMPS and O-RAMPS achieved similar results. In model 2, O-RAMPS was associated with lower comprehensive complication index scores (MD = 11.2; p = 0.038), and CR-POPF rates (OR = 0.2; p = 0.001). In model 3, robotic-RAMPS had a higher probability of negative resection margins.

CONCLUSION

In patients with anatomically resectable PDAC, MI-RAMPS is feasible and as safe as O-RAMPS.

The Presence of an Aberrant Right Hepatic Artery Did Not Influence Surgical and Oncological Outcomes After Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The presence of an aberrant right hepatic artery (a-RHA) could influence the oncological and postoperative results after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD).

METHODS

A systematic review and metanalysis were conducted, including all comparative studies having patients who underwent PD without (na-RHA) or with a-RHA. The results were reported as risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs), or hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (95 CI). The random effects model was used to calculate the effect sizes. The endpoints were distinguished as critical and important. Critical endpoints were: R1 resection, overall survival (OS), morbidity, mortality, and biliary fistula (BL). Important endpoints were: postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF), delayed gastric emptying (DGE), post pancreatectomy hemorrhage (PPH), length of stay (LOS), and operative time (OT).

RESULTS

Considering the R1 rate no significant differences were observed between the two groups (RR 1.06; 0.89 to 1.27). The two groups have a similar OS (HR 0.95; 0.85 to 1.06). Postoperative morbidity and mortality were similar between the two groups, with a RR of 0.97 (0.88 to 1.06) and 0.81 (0.54 to 1.20), respectively. The biliary fistula rate was similar between the two groups (RR of 1.09; 0.72 to 1.66). No differences were observed for non-critical endpoints.

CONCLUSION

The presence of a-RHA does not affect negatively the short-term and long-term clinical outcomes of PD.

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage using a lumen-apposing metal stent as rescue treatment for malignant distal biliary obstruction: a large multicenter experience

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

EUS-guided gallbladder drainage (EUS-GBD) with lumen-apposing metal stents (LAMSs) has been reported as a rescue treatment with encouraging results for the relief of jaundice in patients with distal malignant biliary obstruction (DMBO) and after failure of both ERCP and EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy.

METHODS

This was a multicenter retrospective analysis of all cases of consecutive EUS-GBD with LAMSs used as a rescue treatment for patients with DMBO in 14 Italian centers from June 2015 to June 2020. Primary endpoints were technical and clinical success, whereas the secondary endpoint was the adverse event (AE) rate.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (52.1% women) with a mean age of 74.3 ± 11.7 years were included in the study. Biliary stricture was related to pancreatic adenocarcinoma (85.4%), duodenal adenocarcinoma (2.1%), cholangiocarcinoma (4.2%), ampullary cancer (2.1%), colon cancer (4.2%), and metastatic breast cancer (2.1%). The mean diameter of the common bile duct was 13.3 ± 2.8 mm. LAMSs were placed transgastrically in 58.3% of cases and transduodenally in 41.7%. Technical success was 100%, whereas clinical success was 81.3%, with a mean total bilirubin reduction after 2 weeks of 66.5%. The mean procedure time was 26.4 minutes, and the mean hospital stay was 9.2 ± 8.2 days. AEs occurred in 5 patients (10.4%): 3 were classified as intraprocedural and 2 were classified as delayed because they occurred after >15 days. When the American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy lexicon was used, 2 AEs were mild and 3 were moderate (2 buried LAMSs). The mean follow-up was 122 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that EUS-GBD with LAMSs used as a rescue treatment for patients affected by DMBO represents a valuable option in terms of technical and clinical success rates, with an acceptable AE rate. To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest study concerning the use of this procedure. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT03903523.).

The benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) was effective in improving overall survival (OS) of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. However, its application in resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to determine whether NAT has a greater advantage over conventional upfront surgery (US) in terms of resection rate, R0 resection rate, positive lymph node rate, and OS. We identified articles before October 7, 2022, by searching four electronic databases. The studies included in the meta-analysis all met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of the articles. OS, DFS, resection rate, R0 resection rate and positive lymph nodes rate were extracted. Odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, and sensitivity analysis and publication bias were used to assess the sources of heterogeneity. In total, 24 studies, involving 1384 (35.66%) patients assigned to NAT and 2497 (64.43%) patients assigned to US, were included in the analysis. NAT could effectively prolong OS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65-0.82, P < 0.001) and DFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.84, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis results of 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) also showed that RPC patients could benefit from NAT in the long term (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90, P = 0.003). NAT decreased resection rate (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33-0.55, P < 0.001), but was associated with increased R0 resection rate (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.47-2.88, P < 0.001) and decreased positive lymph node rate (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.52, P < 0.001). Although the application of NAT increases the risk of patients not being able to undergo surgical resection, it can prolong the OS and delay tumor progression in RPC. Therefore, we still expect larger and higher-quality RCTs to confirm the effectiveness of NAT.

National adoption of neoadjuvant chemotherapy: paradigm shift in the treatment of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The historical standard of care in treating operable pancreatic cancer via upfront surgery has been challenged recently using a neoadjuvant approach. The aim of the study is to examine the national practice patterns in the management of pancreatic cancer with an emphasis on the trends of neoadjuvant systemic therapy use.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional time-series study using the National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2019. Patients who underwent resection for stage I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma were selected.

RESULTS

Overall, 25% of patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 49% had surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and 26% had surgery alone. The rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has increased from 11% in 2006 to 43% in 2019. There was a decrease in the rate of surgery followed by chemotherapy from 48% to 38%, and a decrease in the rate of surgery alone from 41% to 19%. The rate of radiation therapy use has decreased over time, as has the resection rate, while median overall survival has steadily improved over the years.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2019, the rate of using neoadjuvant systemic therapy overtook the rate of surgery first followed by adjuvant systemic therapy, marking a pragmatic national shift in the clinical management of pancreatic cancer.

Current clinical practice in the management of Brazilian patients with potentially resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to describe the routine clinical practice of physicians involved in the treatment of patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in Brazil.

METHODS

Physicians were invited through email and text messages to participate in an electronic survey sponsored by the Brazilian Gastrointestinal Tumor Group (GTG) and the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO). We evaluated the relationship between variable categories numerically with false discovery rate-adjusted Fisher's exact test p values and graphically with Multiple Correspondence Analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 255 physicians answered the survey. Most (52.5%) were medical oncologists, treated patients predominantly in the private setting (71.0%), and had access to multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTDTB; 76.1%). Medical oncologists were more likely to describe neoadjuvant therapy as beneficial in the resectable setting and surgeons in the borderline resectable setting. Most physicians would use information on risk factors for early recurrence, frailty, and type of surgery to decide treatment strategy. Doctors working predominantly in public institutions were less likely to have access to MTDTB and to consider FOLFIRINOX the most adequate regimen in the neoadjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences exist in the management of localized PDAC, some of them possibly explained by the medical specialty, but also by the funding source of health care.

Ethical Considerations of Biopsies in Early-Stage Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE

The standard of care in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has evolved to include neoadjuvant treatment before surgical resection. Current guidelines call for obtaining histologic tissue diagnosis via endoscopic ultrasound fine-needle aspiration before administration of neoadjuvant therapy, which differ from guidelines discouraging delay in surgical resection for a biopsy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Whether to proceed with treatment before a biopsy confirms that malignancy is a nuanced decision and includes considerations of physical and psychological risks entailed in both pursuing and forgoing a biopsy.

RESULTS

Accuracy of imaging and biopsy results, the presence of contributing clinical signs/symptoms, and the existing precedents of considering biopsies as waivable such as in scenarios with high clinical suspicion and primary surgical resection.

CONCLUSION

When considering the aspects of ethical medical practice including beneficence (doing good), nonmaleficence (avoiding harm), autonomy (allowing patients to make decisions about their care), and utilitarianism (doing the most good for the most people), analysis of whether guidelines guiding biopsies should continue to differ between resection and neoadjuvant treatments in PDAC is prudent.

Neo-Adjuvant Treatment in Primary Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and PRISMA-Compliant Updated Metanalysis of Oncological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in treatment, the prognosis of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains poor. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has gained great interest in hopes of improving survival. However, the results of available studies based on different treatment approaches, such as chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, showed contrasting results. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to clarify the benefit of NAT compared to upfront surgery (US) in primarily resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A PRISMA literature review identified 139 studies, of which 15 were finally included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. All data from eligible articles was summarized in a systematic summary and then used for the meta-analysis. Specifically, we used HR for OS and DFS and risk estimates (odds ratios) for the R0 resection rate and the N+ rate. The risk of bias was correctly assessed according to the nature of the studies included.

RESULTS

From the pooled HRs, OS for NAT patients was better, with an HR for death of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.90) at a significance level of less than 1%. In the sub-group analysis, no difference was found between patients treated with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy exclusively. The meta-analysis of seven studies that reported DFS for NAT resulted in a pooled HR for progression of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.56-0.79) with a significance level of less than 1%. A significantly lower risk of positive lymph nodes (OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.32-0.63) and an improved R0 resection rate (OR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.23-2.36) were also found in patients treated with NAT, despite high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

NAT is associated with improved survival for patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, the optimal treatment strategy has yet to be defined, and further studies are required.

The experience of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Upfront resection (UR) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy remains the standard treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer. There is increasing evidence suggesting favourable outcomes toward neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery.

METHODS

All clinical staging with resectable pancreatic cancer patients treated at a tertiary medical centre from 2013 to 2020 were identified. The baseline characteristics, treatment course, surgery outcome and survival results of UR or NAC were compared.

RESULTS

Finally, in 159 resectable patients, 46 patients (29%) underwent NAC and 113 patients (71%) received UR. In NAC, 11 patients (24%) did not receive resection, 4 (36.4%) for comorbidity, 2 (18.2%) for patient refusal and 2 (18.2%) for disease progression. In UR, 13 patients (12%) were unresectable intraoperatively; 6 (46.2%) for locally advanced and 5 (38.5%) for distant metastasis. Overall, 97% of patients in NAC and 58% of patients in UR completed adjuvant chemotherapy. As of data cut-off, 24 patients (69%) in NAC and 42 patients (29%) in UR were still tumour free. The median recurrence-free survival in NAC, UR with adjuvant chemotherapy and without adjuvant chemotherapy were 31.3 months (95% CI, 14.4-not estimable), 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.3) and 8.5 months (95% CI, 5.8-11.8), P =0.036; and the median overall survival in each group were not reached (95% CI, 29.7-not estimable), 25.9 months (95% CI, 21.1-40.5) and 21.7 months (12.0-32.8), P =0.0053. Based on initial clinical staging, the median overall survival of NAC was not significantly different from UR with a tumour less than or equal to 2 cm, P =0.29. NAC patients had a higher R0 resection rate (83% versus 53%), lower recurrence rate (31% versus 71%) and harvested median number lymph node (23 versus 15).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that NAC is superior to UR in resectable pancreatic cancer with better survival.

Safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on our resectability criteria for locally advanced perihilar cholangiocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is not commonly used for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PHC). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of NAC for PHC.

METHODS

Ninety-one PHC patients without metastases were treated at our department. Patients were classified as resectable (R), borderline resectable (BR), or locally advanced unresectable (LA). Upfront surgery (US) was performed for R-PHC patients without regional lymph node metastases (LNM) or those unable to tolerate NAC. The NAC regimen comprised two courses of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced PHC: R-PHC with LNM, BR, and LA.

RESULTS

US and NAC were performed on 32 and 59 patients, respectively. For US, 31 patients underwent curative intent surgery (upfront-CIS). NAC caused adverse effects in 10/59 (17%), allowed 36/59 (61%) to undergo curative intent surgery (NAC-CIS) without impairing liver function, and spared 23/59 (39%) from undergoing resection (NAC-UR). Overall survival was better in the upfront-CIS and NAC-CIS groups than in the NAC-UR group (MST: 74 vs 57 vs 17 months, p < 0.001). In 59 NAC patients, tumour size response occurred in 11/11 (100%) of R, 22/33 (66.7%) of BR, and 9/15 (60.0%) of LA patients. The un-resection rate was the highest in the LA group (27% [3/11] than in R, 30% [10/33] in BR, and 67% [10/15] in LA, p = 0.039). Multivariate analyses revealed that LA and age were independent risk factors for non-resection after NAC.

CONCLUSION

was safe and contributed to improving survival in advanced PHC patients. R-PHC was responsive to NAC, but LA remains a risk factor for non-resection through NAC.

No survival benefit with suboptimal CA19-9 response: defining effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is gaining popularity over a surgery-first (SF) approach in treating resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, what constitutes effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy is unknown.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed resectable and borderline resectable PDAC patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (2010-2019) at a single institution. Optimal CA19-9 response was defined as normalization AND >50% reduction. We utilized Kaplan-Meier and multivariable-adjusted Cox models and competing risk subdistribution methods for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

586 patients were included in this study. The multivariable-adjusted analysis demonstrated OS benefit in the NAC group only when OS was calculated from diagnosis (HR = 0.72, p = 0.02), but not from surgery (HR = 0.81, p = 0.1). However, in 59 patients who achieved optimal CA19-9 response, OS is significantly longer than the 134 patients with suboptimal CA19-9 response (39.3 m vs. 21.5 m, p = 0.005) or the 117 SF patients (39.3 m vs. 19.5 m, p < 0.001). Notably, a suboptimal CA19-9 response conferred no OS advantage compared to SF patients. The accumulative incidence of liver metastases (but not other metastases) was significantly reduced only in patients with optimal CA19-9 response to NAC (multivariable-adjusted subdistribution HR = 0.26, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

CA19-9 response to NAC may serve as the marker for effective NAC. These findings warrant validation in a multi-institutional study.

Disparities in Receipt of Adjuvant Therapy After Upfront Surgical Resection for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

A multimodal approach of surgery and chemotherapy, with or without radiation, is the mainstay of therapy with curative-intent for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study compared utilization trends and outcomes of upfront surgery with and without adjuvant therapy.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients with a diagnosis of stage 1 or 2 PDAC who underwent upfront resection. Multivariable regression was applied to identify factors associated with initiation of adjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Of the 39,128 patients in the study, 67% initiated adjuvant therapy after resection, whereas 33% received upfront surgery alone. Receipt of adjuvant multimodal therapy increased from 59% in 2006 to 69% in 2017 (P < 0.0001). Non-white race was associated with lower odds of receiving adjuvant therapy after adjustment for income status, education attainment, and other variables (Hispanic/Spanish [odds ratio {OR}, 0.77; 95% confidence interval {CI}, 0.69-0.86] and non-Hispanic black [OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.78-0.91 vs non-Hispanic white; P < 0.001). The variables that contributed to receipt of adjuvant therapy were place of residence in high versus low education attainment area (OR 1.30; 95% CI 1.18-1.44; P < 0.0001) and lower odds for initiation of adjuvant therapy with increasing distance from the treating facility (> 50 miles [OR 0.51; 95% CI 0.47-0.54] vs <12.5 miles; P < 0.0001). The median unadjusted overall survival (OS) time was 18.2 months (95% CI 17.7-18.8 months) for upfront surgery alone and 25.3 months (95% CI 24.9-25.8 months) for surgery with adjuvant therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients who underwent upfront surgical resection for PDAC showed wide socioeconomic disparities in the use of adjuvant therapy independent of insurance status, facility type, or travel distance.

Efficacy and safety of total neoadjuvant therapy in locally advanced rectal cancer: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The standard of care for locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) has changed from a single radical surgical treatment to the current multimodality treatment (standard chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and total neoadjuvant therapy (TNT)). The efficacy and safety of both TNT and standard CRT are evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

RCTs were comprehensively searched in Chinese and English electronic databases. The experimental and control groups were TNT and the standard CRT, respectively, included in this meta-analysis. The outcomes were assessed through a fixed-effect or random-effect model of pooled odds (OR) or hazard ratios (HR).

RESULTS

Eleven RCTs, involving 3,101 patients were included in the final analysis. TNT showed increase in the pathological complete response (pCR) (OR = 1.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.57-2.41; P < 0.05) and the R0 resection (OR = 1.19, 95% CI: 0.99-1.43; P = 0.062). There was no significant difference in local recurrence-free survival (LRFS) (HR = 0.97, P = 0.803), but TNT had better 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) (HR = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.72-0.93, P < 0.05), overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.74-1.02, P = 0.08) and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) (HR = 0.79, 95% CI: 0.67-0.93, P < 0.05) than standard CRT.

CONCLUSIONS

TNT was safe and feasible as it improved pCR and survival outcomes, and reduced the risk of distant metastasis compared with standard CRT. TNT may be a superior strategy for LARC, but more RCTs are needed to prove it.

REGISTRATION AND PROTOCOL

PROSPERO CRD42022327697. We added the Chinese database after registration because of the inclusion of fewer RCTs www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ .

A Paradigm Shifts: Neoadjuvant Therapy for Clearly Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Over the past decade, neoadjuvant therapy has become the standard of care for patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The surgical community remains divided regarding the value of neoadjuvant therapy for patients who present with clearly resectable disease. Thus far, randomized controlled trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy with conventional upfront surgical strategies for patients with clearly resectable pancreatic cancer have been plagued by poor accrual, and are often underpowered. Nonetheless, meta-analyses of the results of these trials suggest that neoadjuvant therapy can be offered as an acceptable standard of care for patients with clearly resectable pancreatic cancer. Previous trials used neoadjuvant gemcitabine, but more recent studies have demonstrated superior survival for patients who were able to tolerate neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan hydrochloride, and oxaliplatin). The increased utilization of FOLFIRINOX may be shifting the treatment paradigm in favor of neoadjuvant therapy among patients with clearly resectable disease. Randomized controlled trials assessing the value of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in clearly resectable pancreatic cancer, which are expected to provide more conclusive recommendations, are still ongoing. This review outlines the rationale, considerations, and current level of evidence for the use of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with clearly resectable pancreatic cancer.

Pancreaticoduodenectomy for benign and premalignant pancreatic and ampullary disease: is robotic surgery the better approach?

BACKGROUND

The robotic platform is increasingly being utilized in pancreatic surgery, yet its overall merits and putative advantages remain to be adjudicated. We hypothesize that the benefits of minimally invasive pancreatic surgery are maximized in pancreatic benign and premalignant disease, in the setting of friable pancreatic tissue and small pancreatic duct.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of our prospectively maintained pancreatic database of all consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for benign or premalignant conditions between 2010 and 2020. Peri-operative outcomes and long-term complications were compared between robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (RPD) and open pancreaticoduodenectomy (OPD).

RESULTS

One hundred and eighty eight (n = 188) patients met our inclusion criteria, of which 68 were OPD and 120 RPD. Malignant histologies were excluded. There were only minor differences in baseline characteristics between the two groups. Post-operative merits of the RPD included lower clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula 10 (8.3%) vs 24 (35.3%), p < 0.001, fewer surgical site infections; 9 (7.5%) vs 11 (16.2%), p = 0.024, shorter operative time, greater lymph node yield; 29 (IQR 21, 38) vs 21 (IQR 13, 34), p = 0.001, and lower 90 days mortality; 1 (0.8%) vs 4 (5.9%), p = 0.039. Rates of long-term complications were similar, exception made for a higher occurrence of small bowel obstruction (SBO) 2 (1.7%) vs 4 (5.9%), p = 0.031 and need for surgical intervention for SBO 0 (0.0%) vs 2 (2.9%), p = 0.019 in the OPD group.

CONCLUSION

Our study suggests that RPD benefits include lower 90-day mortality, shorter LOS, and lower rates of selected complications compared to open pancreaticoduodenectomy.

RAB27B expression in pancreatic cancer is predictive of poor survival but good response to chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer is the 4th leading cause of cancer-related death with poor survival even after curative resection. RAB27A and RAB27B are key players in the exosome pathway where they play important roles in exosome secretion. Evidence suggests that RAB27A and RAB27B expression not only leads to tumor proliferation and invasion, but also plays an important role in antigen transfer necessary for anticancer immunity.

OBJECTIVE

In this study, we analyze the expression of RAB27A and RAB27B in patients after pancreatic cancer surgery with or without adjuvant chemotherapy and its influence on overall survival.

METHODS

We analyzed a total of 167 patients with pancreatic cancer for their RAB27A and RAB27B expression. We dichotomized the patients along the median and compared survival in patients with high and low RAB27A and RAB27B expression with or without adjuvant chemotherapy treatment.

RESULTS

We found a significant improvement in overall survival in patients with a negative resection margin (p= 0.037) and in patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy (p= 0.039). The survival benefit after chemotherapy was dependent on RAB27B expression status: only the subgroup of patients with high RAB27B expression benefited from adjuvant chemotherapy (p= 0.006), but not the subgroup with low RAB27B expression (p= 0.59). Patients with high RAB27B expression who did not receive adjuvant chemotherapy showed a trend towards worse survival compared to the other subgroups. This difference was abolished after treatment with adjuvant chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that RAB27B expression in pancreatic cancer might identify a subgroup of patients with poor survival who might respond well to adjuvant chemotherapy. If resectable, these patients could be considered for neoadjuvant chemotherapy to minimize the risk of not receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Further prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Real-world implications of nonbiological factors with staging, clinical management, and prognostic prediction in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor-node-metastasis (TNM) staging system focuses on traditional biological factors (BFs). The present study incorporates nonbiological factors (NBFs) into the AJCC-TNM staging system in terms of the advanced clinical management and prognostic-prediction accuracy of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Eight thousand three hundred and thirty eligible patients with PDAC were obtained from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2015. Multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis and Kaplan-Meier curves were used to testify the feasibility of cancer-specific survival (CSS) prediction based on TNM-NBF stages.

RESULTS

The large population-based study demonstrated that NBFs (insurance status, marital status, county-level median household income, and unemployment) were significant prognostic indicators (p < 0.005), and multivariate Cox regression analysis demonstrated that the NBF1 stage carried a 29.4% increased risk of cancer-specific mortality than NBF0 stage (p < 0.001). The concordance index of TNM-NBF stage was 0.755 (95% confidence interval: 0.740-0.769).

CONCLUSIONS

The novel NBF stage was independently associated with CSS of PDAC. In addition, combining TNM with the NBF stage could provide better clinical management and prognostic-prediction accuracy.

Current Treatment of Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Medical Oncologist's Perspective

Pancreatic cancer has traditionally been associated with a dismal prognosis, even in early stages of the disease. In recent years, the introduction of newer generation chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant setting has improved the survival of patients treated with upfront resection. However, there are multiple theoretical advantages to deliver early systemic therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer. So far, the evidence supports the use of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The benefit of this treatment sequence for patients with resectable disease remains elusive. In this review, we summarize the data on adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer and describe which evidence backs the use of neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, we address important issues faced in clinical practice when treating patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

Clinical diagnosis and management of pancreatic cancer: Markers, molecular mechanisms, and treatment options

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the third-leading cause of cancer deaths. The overall 5-year survival rate of PC is 9%, and this rate for metastatic PC is below 3%. However, the PC-induced death cases will increase about 2-fold by 2060. Many factors such as genetic and environmental factors and metabolic diseases can drive PC development and progression. The most common type of PC in the clinic is pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, comprising approximately 90% of PC cases. Multiple pathogenic processes including but not limited to inflammation, fibrosis, angiogenesis, epithelial-mesenchymal transition, and proliferation of cancer stem cells are involved in the initiation and progression of PC. Early diagnosis is essential for curable therapy, for which a combined panel of serum markers is very helpful. Although some mono or combined therapies have been approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for PC treatment, current therapies have not shown promising outcomes. Fortunately, the development of novel immunotherapies, such as oncolytic viruses-mediated treatments and chimeric antigen receptor-T cells, combined with therapies such as neoadjuvant therapy plus surgery, and advanced delivery systems of immunotherapy will improve therapeutic outcomes and combat drug resistance in PC patients. Herein, the pathogenesis, molecular signaling pathways, diagnostic markers, prognosis, and potential treatments in completed, ongoing, and recruiting clinical trials for PC were reviewed.

Expansion of KRAS hotspot mutations reactive T cells from human pancreatic tumors using autologous T cells as the antigen-presenting cells

Adoptive cell therapy (ACT) with expanded tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) or TCR gene-modified T cells (TCR-T) that recognize mutant KRAS neo-antigens can mediate tumor regression in patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) (Tran et al in N Engl J Med, 375:2255-2262, 2016; Leidner et al in N Engl J Med, 386:2112-2119, 2022). The mutant KRAS-targeted ACT holds great potential to achieve durable clinical responses for PDAC, which has had no meaningful improvement over 40 years. However, the wide application of mutant KRAS-centric ACT is currently limited by the rarity of TIL that recognize the mutant KRAS. In addition, PDAC is generally recognized as a poorly immunogenic tumor, and TILs in PDAC are less abundant than in immunogenic tumors such as melanoma. To increase the success rate of TIL production, we adopted a well-utilized K562-based artificial APC (aAPC) that expresses 4-1BBL as the costimulatory molecules to enhance the TIL production from PDCA. However, stimulation with K562-based aAPC led to a rapid loss of specificity to mutant KRAS. To selectively expand neo-antigen-specific T cells, particularly mKRAS, from the TILs, we used tandem mini gene-modified autologous T cells (TMG-T) as the novel aAPC. Using this modified IVS protocol, we successfully generated TIL cultures specifically reactive to mKRAS (G12V). We believe that autologous TMG-T cells provide a reliable source of autologous APC to expand a rare population of neoantigen-specific T cells in TILs.

Repositioning Mifepristone as a Leukaemia Inhibitory Factor Receptor Antagonist for the Treatment of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer is a leading cause of cancer mortality and is projected to become the second-most common cause of cancer mortality in the next decade. While gene-wide association studies and next generation sequencing analyses have identified molecular patterns and transcriptome profiles with prognostic relevance, therapeutic opportunities remain limited. Among the genes that are upregulated in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC), the leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF), a cytokine belonging to IL-6 family, has emerged as potential therapeutic candidate. LIF is aberrantly secreted by tumour cells and promotes tumour progression in pancreatic and other solid tumours through aberrant activation of the LIF receptor (LIFR) and downstream signalling that involves the JAK1/STAT3 pathway. Since there are no LIFR antagonists available for clinical use, we developed an in silico strategy to identify potential LIFR antagonists and drug repositioning with regard to LIFR antagonists. The results of these studies allowed the identification of mifepristone, a progesterone/glucocorticoid antagonist, clinically used in medical abortion, as a potent LIFR antagonist. Computational studies revealed that mifepristone binding partially overlapped the LIFR binding site. LIF and LIFR are expressed by human PDAC tissues and PDAC cell lines, including MIA-PaCa-2 and PANC-1 cells. Exposure of these cell lines to mifepristone reverses cell proliferation, migration and epithelial mesenchymal transition induced by LIF in a concentration-dependent manner. Mifepristone inhibits LIFR signalling and reverses STAT3 phosphorylation induced by LIF. Together, these data support the repositioning of mifepristone as a potential therapeutic agent in the treatment of PDAC.

Prognostic significance of preoperative and postoperative CA 19-9 normalization in pancreatic adenocarcinoma treated with neoadjuvant therapy or surgery first

BACKGROUND

Normal(ization) of serum carbohydrate 19-9 (CA19-9) before/after surgery has not been compared in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NT) versus surgery-first (SF).

METHODS

Characteristics for patients with PDAC who underwent resection from July 2011 to October 2018 were collected. Patients with pre-/postoperative CA19-9, bilirubin <2 mg/dL, and initial CA19-9 > 1 U/ml were included. Overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were compared by pre-/postoperative CA19-9.

RESULTS

In patients receiving NT, normal pre/postoperative CA19-9 ("NTnl/nl ") was associated with median RFS and OS (26 and 77mo), followed by those who normalized after surgery ("NTabnl/nl " 16 and 44mo). For SF patients, normal pre-/postoperative CA19-9 ("SFnl/nl ") was associated with median RFS and OS (115 and not estimable mo), followed by those who normalized after resection ("SFabnl/nl " 18 and 49mo). Groups "NTabnl/abnl " and "SFabnl/abnl " with elevated CA19-9 both before and after resection had the worst median RFS and OS durations.

CONCLUSIONS

While a normal(ized) postoperative CA19-9 may result in similar survival as preoperative normal(ization), postoperative normalization failed to occur in nearly 30% of SF patients. NT should be considered in patients presenting with elevated CA19-9. If considering SF, ideal patients may include those with normal CA19-9 at presentation.

Impact of radiologic splenic vessel invasion in resectable left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: predictor of early systemic recurrence following upfront surgery

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study is to identify prognostic factors and the best candidates for neoadjuvant therapy among patients with resectable left-sided pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) by analyzing the timing and pattern of recurrence following upfront surgery.

METHODS

This single-center retrospective study included patients with resectable left-sided PDAC who underwent upfront distal pancreatectomy from 2005 to 2015. A minimum P value approach was used to evaluate the optimal cutoff of early recurrence. The predictors of recurrence were assessed with Cox regression analysis.

RESULTS

Among 311 included patients, 241 (77.5%) had a recurrence at a median follow-up of 29.3 months. Systemic recurrence occurred in 194 patients (80.5%) and isolated local recurrence in 47 patients (19.5%). A recurrence-free survival cutoff of 12 months was selected to distinguish between early and late recurrence. The patients with early recurrence had a shorter median overall survival (16.1 vs. 39.9 months, P<0.001) and post-recurrence survival (9.6 vs. 17.2 months, P<0.001) than those with late recurrence. The patients with systemic recurrence had a shorter median overall survival (19.6 vs. 29.1 months, P=0.007) and post-recurrence survival (11.0 vs. 15.3 months, P=0.024) than those with an isolated local recurrence. In multivariable analysis, preoperative CA 19-9 ≥500 U/mL [odd ratio (OR) 2.037, P=0.035], radiologic splenic vessels invasion (OR 5.014, P<0.001), positive radial resection margin (OR 2.638, P<0.001), and no adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 2.084, P=0.001) were predictors of an early systemic recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiologic splenic vessels invasion may be considered to indicate a biologically borderline status in patients with anatomically resectable left-sided PDAC. Future clinical trials of neoadjuvant therapy targeting these patients should be conducted.

Trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials on neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest level of evidence but can suffer from type I (false-positive) and II (false-negative) errors, which can be estimated through trial sequential analysis (TSA) demonstrating eventual credibility of results. Aim of the study was to establish through TSA which strategy between neoadjuvant approach or upfront surgery provides best results when treating potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RCTs were searched until September 2021. Intention-to-treat (ITT) overall survival, resection rate, ITT R0 and N0 rates and per-protocol R0 and N0 rates were the outcomes considered. Fixed-effect model was applied. TSA assumed an alpha = 5% and a power = 80%.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were identified accruing 325 patients for the ITT analyses and 242 for the per-protocol analyses. Neoadjuvant did not improve survival (p = 0.167) and TSA supported that this result was underpowered, requiring additional 1514 patients to prove credibility. Neoadjuvant reduced resection rate (p = 0.044) but type I error was not avoided. Neoadjuvant credibly increased per-protocol R0 and N0 rates (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001), and TSA showed that these were true-positive findings. Neoadjuvant did not increase ITT R0 rate since randomization (p = 0.169) but TSA showed lack of power. Neoadjuvant credibly increased the ITT N0 rate (p < 0.001) and TSA supported that this was a true positive finding.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant strategy credibly demonstrated superiority over upfront surgery in determine per-protocol R0 resection and N0 rates, as well as ITT N0 rate. For the remaining outcomes, TSA suggested the need of larger samples to exclude type I and II errors.

Trends in Preoperative Chemotherapy Utilization for Proximal Pancreatic Cancer: Are We Making Progress?

BACKGROUND

While it has been shown that neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) for pancreatic cancer (PDAC) undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) is critical for optimal oncologic management, NCT is (A) not universally practiced and (B) the reasons ill-defined. This study investigates national rates, trends, and factors affecting NCT utilization.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, patients who underwent PD for PDAC between 2006 and 2017 were identified. Changes in chemotherapy sequence over time were identified. For patients diagnosed after 2010, multivariable logistic regression models for factors affecting NCT were created.

RESULTS

A total of 128,980 patients were diagnosed and 23,206 underwent surgery. Three thousand five (12.9%) received NCT with a preoperative chemotherapy (NCT + PCT) utilization rate of 7.3% in 2004 that increased to 36.8% in 2017. Factors affecting utilization of preoperative chemotherapy were age (OR 0.972), academic and integrated network institutions (OR 1.916, OR 1.559), institutional case volume (OR 1.007), distance from the hospital (OR 1.002), stage (IB OR 3.108, IIA OR 3.133, IIB OR 3.775, III OR 3.782), grade IV (OR 1.977), and insurance status (private OR 2.371, Medicaid OR 1.811, and Medicare OR 2.191, government OR 2.645).

CONCLUSION

Even though more than 3/5 of patients receive no preoperative chemotherapy (NCT + PCT) and nearly 1/5 of patients still receive no chemotherapy at all, utilization of NCT is increasing. Moreover, since this study demonstrates that omission of NCT is associated with modifiable factors such as type of institution and health care disparity, mechanisms (reimbursement, policy) geared to change current national practice patterns may most immediately affect optimal oncologic management.

3D In Vivo Models for Translational Research on Pancreatic Cancer: The Chorioallantoic Membrane (CAM) Model

Simple Summary

The 5-year overall survival rate for all stages of pancreatic cancer is relatively low at about only 6%. As a result of this exceedingly poor prognosis, new research models are necessary to investigate this highly malignant cancer. One model that has been used extensively for a vast variety of different cancers is the chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model. It is based on an exceptionally vascularized membrane that develops within fertilized chicken eggs and can be used for the grafting and analysis of tumor tissue. The aim of the study was to summarize already existing works on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and the CAM model. The results were subdivided into different categories that include drug testing, angiogenesis, personalized medicine, modifications of the model, and further developments to help improve the unfavorable prognosis of this disease.

Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly aggressive cancer with adverse outcomes that have barely improved over the last decade. About half of all patients present with metastasis at the time of diagnosis, and the 5-year overall survival rate across all stages is only 6%. Innovative in vivo research models are necessary to combat this cancer and to discover novel treatment strategies. The chorioallantoic membrane (CAM) model represents one 3D in vivo methodology that has been used in a large number of studies on different cancer types for over a century. This model is based on a membrane formed within fertilized chicken eggs that contain a dense network of blood vessels. Because of its high cost-efficiency, simplicity, and versatility, the CAM model appears to be a highly valuable research tool in the pursuit of gaining more in-depth insights into PDAC. A summary of the current literature on the usage of the CAM model for the investigation of PDAC was conducted and subdivided into angiogenesis, drug testing, modifications, personalized medicine, and further developments. On this comprehensive basis, further research should be conducted on PDAC in order to improve the abysmal prognosis of this malignant disease.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

The role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) has yet to be defined. This review aims to analyze the benefit of NC in RPC compared with upfront surgery (US) in terms of overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PubMed, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), and Embase were systematically reviewed until 3 November 2021. Abstract proceedings and virtual meeting presentations from the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the European Society of Medical Oncology conferences, reference articles of published clinical trials, and review articles were considered. Only randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing NC administration with or without radiotherapy previous with surgery (experimental arm) versus US followed by adjuvant chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy (control arm) for RPC were included.

RESULTS

A total of 1135 studies were screened. Of these, 1117 studies were primarily excluded. Of the remaining 18 studies, 5 were excluded because of no adequate trial design for this work and 7 others had no available results. Finally, 6 trials with 469 patients with pancreatic cancer randomized to NC (n = 212) or US (n = 257) were selected. Compared with US, NC significantly improved OS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.98; P = 0.033] and DFS (HR 0.73; 95% CI 0.59-0.89; P = 0.002). While the NC approach was not significantly associated with lower resection rate [relative risk (RR) 0.92; 95% CI 0.84-1.01; P = 0.069], the R0 resection rate was significantly higher for NC than for US (RR 1.31; 95% CI 1.13-1.52; P = 0.0004).

CONCLUSION

This is the first meta-analysis of RCTs showing that NC improves OS for RPC compared with US followed by adjuvant therapy. Ongoing RCTs should confirm these findings with FOLFIRINOX to generalize the indication of NC.

Subtyping for pancreatic cancer precision therapy

The cases of pancreatic cancer and associated deaths are increasing consistently and have become a global health concern. Prevalent intratumoral and intertumoral heterogeneity in pancreatic cancer has been revealed as an important cause of its poor prognosis. However, few precision management strategies have been formulated to treat this complex disease. There is growing evidence supporting the significance of subtyping pancreatic tumors on the basis of their molecular characteristics for improving the accuracy of clinical decision-making on treatment. Here, we summarize the current approaches to classification of pancreatic cancer, and highlight the feasibility and potential defects of their application in precision therapy.

[Surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer-What is new?]

The incidence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is continuously increasing and will become the second leading cause of cancer-related death in Europe and the USA by 2030. With a 5-year overall survival rate of less than 10% the prognosis remains poor. So far surgical tumor resection remains the only curative treatment option, which is now partially supported by multimodal neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy concepts. Due to the aggressive tumor biology patients with advanced pancreatic cancer in particular can profit from these multimodal therapy concepts. Additionally, in recent years surgical treatment was optimized, the criteria for tumor resectablity were defined and minimally invasive surgery was widely introduced. This review article summarizes the newest developments and the new German S3 guidelines concerning surgery of pancreatic cancer.

[Better Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer through More Radical Surgery?]

Despite advances in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, the survival of affected patients remains limited. A more radical surgical therapy could help to improve the prognosis, in particular by reducing the local recurrence rate, which is around 45% in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. In addition, patients with oligometastatic pancreatic cancer could also benefit from a more radical indication for surgery.Based on an analysis of the literature, important principles of pancreatic cancer surgery were examined.Even if even more radical surgical approaches such as an "extended" lymphadenectomy or a standard complete pancreatectomy do not bring any survival advantage, complete resection of the tumour (R0), a thorough locoregional lymphadenectomy and an adequate radical dissection in the area of the peripancreatic vessels including periarterial nerve plexuses should be the standard of pancreatic carcinoma resections. Whenever necessary to achieve an R0 resection, resections of the pancreas have to be extended, as well as additional venous vascular resections and multivisceral resections had to be performed. Simultaneous arterial vascular resections as part of pancreatic resections as well as surgical resections in oligometastatic patients should, however, be reserved for selected patients. These aspects of the surgical technique in pancreatic carcinoma mentioned above must not be neglected from the point of view of an "existing limited prognosis". On the contrary, they form the absolutely necessary basis in order to achieve good survival results in combination with system therapy. However, it may always be necessary to adapt these standards according to the age, comorbidities and wishes of the patient.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: Increased Use and Improved Optimal Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The introduction of more effective chemotherapy a decade ago has led to increased use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The aim of this study was to assess the evolving use of NAT in individuals with PDAC undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) and to compare their outcomes with patients undergoing upfront operation.

STUDY DESIGN

The American College of Surgeons NSQIP Procedure Targeted Pancreatectomy database was queried from 2014 to 2019. Patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy were evaluated based on the use of NAT versus upfront operation. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine the effect of NAT on postoperative outcomes, including the composite measure optimal pancreatic surgery (OPS). Mann-Kendall trend tests were performed to assess the use of NAT and associated outcomes over time.

RESULTS

A total of 13,257 patients were identified who underwent PD for PDAC between 2014 and 2019. Overall, 33.6% of patients received NAT. The use of NAT increased steadily from 24.2% in 2014 to 42.7% in 2019 (p < 0.0001). On multivariable analysis, NAT was associated with reduced serious morbidity (odds ratio [OR] 0.83, p < 0.001), clinically relevant pancreatic fistulas (OR 0.52, p < 0.001), organ space infections (OR 0.74, p < 0.001), percutaneous drainage (OR 0.73, p < 0.001), reoperation (OR 0.76, p = 0.005), and prolonged length of stay (OR 0.63, p < 0.001). OPS was achieved more frequently in patients undergoing NAT (OR 1.433, p < 0.001) and improved over time in patients receiving NAT (50.7% to 56.6%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

NAT before pancreatoduodenectomy increased more than 3-fold over the past decade and was associated with improved optimal operative outcomes.

Neoadjuvant Treatment for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy?

Worldwide, there is a shifting paradigm from immediate surgery with adjuvant treatment to a neoadjuvant approach for patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC or BRPC). Comparison of neoadjuvant and adjuvant studies is extremely difficult because of a great difference in patient selection. The evidence from randomized studies shows that overall survival by intention-to-treat improves after neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy (various regimens), as compared to immediate surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Radiotherapy appears to play an important role in mediating locoregional effects. Yet, since more effective chemotherapy regimens are currently available, in particular FOLFIRINOX and Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel, these chemotherapy regimens should be investigated in future randomized trials combined with (stereotactic) radiotherapy to further improve outcomes of RPC and BRPC.