Effect of combined epidural anaesthesia on tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes in lung adenocarcinoma: a prospective exploratory sub-analysis

Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Is Not Associated With Improved Survival After Pancreatic Surgery: Long-Term Follow-Up of the Randomized Controlled PAKMAN Trial

BACKGROUND

Perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia (EDA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) are common forms of analgesia after pancreatic surgery. Current guidelines recommend EDA over PCIA, and evidence suggests that EDA may improve long-term survival after surgery, especially in cancer patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether perioperative EDA is associated with an improved patient prognosis compared to PCIA in pancreatic surgery.

METHODS

The PAKMAN trial was an adaptive, pragmatic, international, multicenter, randomized controlled superiority trial conducted from June 2015 to October 2017. Three to five years after index surgery a long-term follow-up was performed from October 2020 to April 2021.

RESULTS

For long-term follow-up of survival, 109 patients with EDA were compared to 111 patients with PCIA after partial pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Long-term follow-up of quality of life (QoL) and pain assessment was available for 40 patients with EDA and 45 patients with PCIA (questionnaire response rate: 94%). Survival analysis revealed that EDA, when compared to PCIA, was not associated with improved overall survival (OS, HR, 1.176, 95% HR-CI, 0.809-1.710, P = .397, n = 220). Likewise, recurrence-free survival did not differ between groups (HR, 1.116, 95% HR-CI, 0.817-1.664, P = .397, n = 220). OS subgroup analysis including only patients with malignancies showed no significant difference between EDA and PCIA (HR, 1.369, 95% HR-CI, 0.932-2.011, P = .109, n = 179). Similar long-term effects on QoL and pain severity were observed in both groups (EDA: n = 40, PCIA: n = 45).

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this long-term follow-up of the PAKMAN randomized controlled trial do not support favoring EDA over PCIA in pancreatic surgery. Until further evidence is available, EDA and PCIA should be considered similar regarding long-term survival.

Effects of Perioperative Epidural Analgesia on Cancer Recurrence and Survival

Surgical resection is the main curative avenue for various cancers. Unfortunately, cancer recurrence following surgery is commonly seen, and typically results in refractory disease and death. Currently, there is no consensus whether perioperative epidural analgesia (EA), including intraoperative and postoperative epidural analgesia, is beneficial or harmful on cancer recurrence and survival. Although controversial, mounting evidence from both clinical and animal studies have reported perioperative EA can improve cancer recurrence and survival via many aspects, including modulating the immune/inflammation response and reducing the use of anesthetic agents like inhalation anesthetics and opioids, which are independent risk factors for cancer recurrence. However, these results depend on the cancer types, cancer staging, patients age, opioids use, and the duration of follow-up. This review will summarize the effects of perioperative EA on the oncological outcomes of patients after cancer surgery.

Epidural Anesthesia-Analgesia and Recurrence-free Survival after Lung Cancer Surgery: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Regional anesthesia and analgesia reduce the stress response to surgery and decrease the need for volatile anesthesia and opioids, thereby preserving cancer-specific immune defenses. This study therefore tested the primary hypothesis that combining epidural anesthesia-analgesia with general anesthesia improves recurrence-free survival after lung cancer surgery.

METHODS

Adults scheduled for video-assisted thoracoscopic lung cancer resections were randomized 1:1 to general anesthesia and intravenous opioid analgesia or combined epidural-general anesthesia and epidural analgesia. The primary outcome was recurrence-free survival (time from surgery to the earliest date of recurrence/metastasis or all-cause death). Secondary outcomes included overall survival (time from surgery to all-cause death) and cancer-specific survival (time from surgery to cancer-specific death). Long-term outcome assessors were blinded to treatment.

RESULTS

Between May 2015 and November 2017, 400 patients were enrolled and randomized to general anesthesia alone (n = 200) or combined epidural-general anesthesia (n = 200). All were included in the analysis. The median follow-up duration was 32 months (interquartile range, 24 to 48). Recurrence-free survival was similar in each group, with 54 events (27%) with general anesthesia alone versus 48 events (24%) with combined epidural-general anesthesia (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.60 to 1.35; P = 0.608). Overall survival was also similar with 25 events (13%) versus 31 (16%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.64 to 1.96; P = 0.697). There was also no significant difference in cancer-specific survival with 24 events (12%) versus 29 (15%; adjusted hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.61 to 1.91; P = 0.802). Patients assigned to combined epidural-general had more intraoperative hypotension: 94 patients (47%) versus 121 (61%; relative risk, 1.29; 95% CI, 1.07 to 1.55; P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Epidural anesthesia-analgesia for major lung cancer surgery did not improve recurrence-free, overall, or cancer-specific survival compared with general anesthesia alone, although the CI included both substantial benefit and harm.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Anaesthesia as an influence in tumour progression

Purpose

Tumour growth and the formation of metastases are essential elements in the progression of cancer. The centre of treatment is the surgical resection of primary solid tumours. But even if the tumour can be removed without microscopic residual cells, local recurrences and distant metastases occur and determine the patient’s fate. During the operation, tumour cells are shed from the primary tumour and released into the circulation. These circulating tumour cells might play an important role in the formation of new tumour sites. Therefore, a functional innate and adaptive immune system is essential, especially in this perioperative period. Anaesthesia influences consciousness and pain perception and interacts directly with the immune system and tumour cells.

Methods

Review of the current literature concerning intra- and postoperative anaesthetic decisions and tumour progression.

Results

There are beneficial aspects for patient survival associated with total intravenous anaesthesia, the use of regional anaesthetics and the avoidance of allogeneic red blood cell transfusions. Alternatives such as irradiated intraoperative blood salvage and preoperative iron supplementation may be advantageous in cases where transfusions are limited or not wanted. The immunosuppressive properties of opioids are theoretical, but strong evidence to avoid them does not exist. The application of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and postoperative nausea and vomiting prophylaxis do not impair the patient’s survival and may even have a positive effect on tumour regression.

Conclusion

Anaesthesia does play an important part in the perioperative period in order to improve the cancer-related outcome. Further research is necessary to make more concrete recommendations.

AURKA and FAM83A are prognostic biomarkers and correlated with Tumor-infiltrating Lymphocytes in smoking related Lung Adenocarcinoma

Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) has become the main histologic type, which account for nearly 40% of lung cancer. The present study aimed to investigate the gene expression signature in smoking related LUAD. A total of 45 smoking related DEGs in LUAD were identified and functional enrichment analysis was also performed. Then Cox's regression model and Kaplan-Meier analysis were used to screen potential prognostic genes. Finally, AURKA and FAM83A were left for further immune-related mechanism exploration. Kaplan-Meier analysis indicated survival rates are related to different immune cell (B cell and Dendritic cell) infiltration levels. Mechanistically, we further explore the correlation between AURKA and FAM83A gene expression levels and tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) level as well as their response to immunomodulators. The results suggested that AURKA and FAM83A are highly expressed in smoking related LUAD, and negatively correlated to B cell and Dendritic cell infiltration levels. At the same time, B cell and Dendritic cell infiltration levels also related to the prognosis of LUAD. We further revealed AURKA and FAM83A could be novel targets to improve the prognosis of LUAD through regulated the response to immunomodulators.

Tumor Pre-Analytics in Molecular Pathology: Impact on Protein Expression and Analysis

Purpose of Review

Precision medicine promises patient tailored, individualized diagnosis and treatment of diseases and relies on clinical specimen integrity and accuracy of companion diagnostic testing. Therefore, pre-analytics, which are defined as the collection, processing, and storage of clinical specimens, are critically important to enable optimal diagnostics, molecular profiling, and clinical decision-making around harvested specimens. This review article discusses the impact of tumor pre-analytics on molecular pathology focusing on biospecimen protein expression and analysis.

Recent Findings

Due to busy clinical schedules and workflows that have been established for many years and to lack of standardization and limited assessment tools to quantify variability in pre-analytical processing, the effects of pre-analytics on biospecimen integrity are often overlooked. Several studies have recently emphasized an emerging crisis in science and reproducibility of results.

Summary

Biomarker instability due to pre-analytical variables affects comprehensive analysis and molecular phenotyping of patients’ tissue. This problematic emphasizes the critical need for standardized protocols and technologies to be applied in the clinical and research setting.