An evaluation of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

The effect of preoperative chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy on pancreatic fistula and other surgical complications after pancreatic resection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy is recommended for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of preoperative therapy on surgical complications in patients with resected pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included studies reporting on the rate of surgical complications after preoperative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery in pancreatic cancer patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of grade B/C POPF. Pooled odds ratios were calculated using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Forty-one comparative studies including 25,389 patients were included. Vascular resections were more often performed after preoperative therapy (29.4% vs. 15.7%, p < 0.001). Preoperative therapy was associated with a lower rate of grade B/C POPF as compared to immediate surgery (pooled OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.38-0.58). This reduction was mostly obtained by preoperative chemoradiotherapy (OR 0.46, 95%CI 0.29-0.73), but not by preoperative chemotherapy alone (OR 0.83, 95%CI 0.59-1.16). No difference was demonstrated for major morbidity, mortality, postpancreatectomy haemorrhage, delayed gastric emptying and overall morbidity.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemo- and chemoradiotherapy in patients with pancreatic cancer appears to be safe with respect to POPF and other surgical complications as compared to immediate surgery. The reduced rate of POPF appears to be attributable to preoperative chemoradiation.

Recurrence Patterns for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma after Upfront Resection Versus Resection Following Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Comprehensive Meta-Analysis

Background: Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) represents a paradigm shift in the management of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with perceived benefits including a higher R0 rate. However, it is unclear whether NAT affects the sites and patterns of recurrence after surgery. This review seeks to compare sites and patterns of recurrence after resection between patients undergoing upfront surgery (US) or after NAT. Methods: The EMBASE, SCOPUS, PubMed, and Cochrane library databases were systematically searched to identify eligible studies that compare recurrence patterns between patients who had NAT (followed by resection) with those that had US. The primary outcome included site-specific recurrence. Results: 26 articles were identified including 4986 patients who underwent resection. Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC, 47% 1074/2264) was the most common, followed by resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC 42%, 949/2264). The weighted overall recurrence rates were lower among the NAT group, 63.4% vs. 74% (US) (OR 0.67 (CI 0.52–0.87), p = 0.006). The overall weighted locoregional recurrence rate was lower amongst patients who received NAT when compared to US (12% vs. 27% OR 0.39 (CI 0.22–0.70), p = 0.004). In BRPC, locoregional recurrence rates improved with NAT (NAT 25.8% US 37.7% OR 0.62 (CI 0.44–0.87), p = 0.007). NAT was associated with a lower weighted liver recurrence rate (NAT 19.4% US 30.1% OR 0.55 (CI 0.34–0.89), p = 0.023). Lung and peritoneal recurrence rates did not differ between NAT and US cohorts (p = 0.705 and p = 0.549 respectively). NAT was associated with a significantly longer weighted mean time to first recurrence 18.8 months compared to US (15.7 months) (OR 0.18 (CI 0.05–0.32), p = 0.015). Conclusion: NAT was associated with lower overall recurrence rate and improved locoregional disease control particularly for those with BRPC. Although the burden of liver metastases was less, there was no overall effect upon distant metastatic disease.

Impact of neoadjuvant therapy on post-operative pancreatic fistula: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic cancer is increasing, although its impact on post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) is variably reported. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the impact of NAT on POPF.

METHODS

A systematic literature search until October 2019 identified studies reporting POPF following NAT (radiotherapy, chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy) versus upfront resection. The primary outcome was overall POPF. Secondary outcomes included grade B/C POPF, delayed gastric emptying (DGE), post-operative pancreatic haemorrhage (PPH) and overall and major complications.

RESULTS

The search identified 24 studies: pancreatoduodenectomy (PD), 19 studies (n = 19 416) and distal pancreatectomy (DP), five studies (n = 477). Local staging was reported in 17 studies, with borderline resectable and locally advanced disease comprising 6% (0-100%) and 1% (0-33%) of the population, respectively. For PD, any NAT was significantly associated with lower rates of overall POPF (OR: 0.57, P < 0.001) and grade B/C POPF (OR: 0.55, P < 0.001). In DP, NAT was not associated with significantly lower rates of overall or grade B/C POPF.

CONCLUSION

NAT is associated with significantly lower rates of POPF after PD but not after DP. Further studies are required to determine whether NAT should be added to POPF risk calculators.

Neoadjuvant Therapy is Essential for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Awareness of the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy is increasing, but its use as an initial therapeutic option for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial, especially for those patients without high-risk prognostic features. Even for patients with high-risk features who are candidates to receive neoadjuvant therapy, no standard regimen exists.

METHODS

In this review, we examined available data on the neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, including prospective studies, retrospective studies, and ongoing clinical trials, by searching PubMed/MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. The characteristics and results of screened studies were described.

RESULTS

Retrospective and prospective studies with reported results and ongoing randomized studies were included. For patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, neoadjuvant therapy provides benefits such as increased survival, decreased risk of comorbidities and mortality, and improved cost-effectiveness due to an increased completion rate of multimodal treatment. Highly active regimens such as FOLFIRINOX (folinic acid, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel are considered acceptable therapeutic regimens. Additionally, platinum-containing regimens other than FOLFIRINOX are acceptable for selected patients. Other therapies, such as chemoradiation treatment, immuno-oncology agents, and targeted therapies are being explored and the results are highly anticipated.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer. Some regimens are currently acceptable, but need more evidence from well-designed clinical trials or should be used after being carefully examined by a multidisciplinary team.

Does neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic head adenocarcinoma increase postoperative morbidity? A systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis

Neoadjuvant treatment (NT) for pancreatic head cancer may allow some patients to undergo curative resection, but its impact on postoperative complications remains unclear. A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to compare overall postoperative morbidity, pancreatic fistula, and mortality between patients who underwent upfront surgery and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy first. Forty-five studies with 3359 patients were included. No significant differences in morbidity and mortality rates associated with NT for pancreatic head cancer were detected in this study.

Survival benefits of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy versus surgery first in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a highly lethal malignancy. Neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy [NAC(R)T] is recommended to use for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and high-risk resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC), but no high-level evidence exists.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library to identify trials comparing survival data of NAC(R)T with SF for RPC or BRPC. Overall survival (OS) was synthesized in analysis of all the patients (intention-to-treat [ITT] analysis) and resected patients respectively.

Results

The meta-analysis included 17 trials with 2286 participants. For BRPC, NAC(R)T improved OS both in ITT analysis (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37–0.65; P < 0.001) and in analysis of resected patients (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51–0.85; P = 0.001) in comparison to SF, accompanied with comparable overall resection rate [odds ratio (OR), 0.69; 95% Cl, 0.41–1.16; P = 0.159]. Disease-free survival, R0 rate, and recurrence were also in favor of NAC(R)T. For RPC, OS in analysis of resected patients was higher with NAC(R)T (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63–0.89; P = 0.001), but OS in ITT analysis was similar (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.85–1.22; P = 0.818). The overall resection rate (OR, 0.50; 95% Cl, 0.25–0.99; P = 0.048) was lower, but R0 rate was higher with NAC(R)T. No differences in disease-free survival and recurrence between NAC(R)T and SF. Survival benefits of NAC(R)T basically persisted across sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis demonstrates that NAC(R)T can provide survival benefits in BRPC patients and a subgroup of RPC patients compared with SF. Future research should focus on investigating the potential biomarkers to screen the subgroup of RPC patients who can benefit from neoadjuvant therapy.

Trial registration

CRD42018103086.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer according to intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains unclear in resectable pancreatic cancer (PC) as compared with upfront surgery (US). The aim of this study was to investigate the survival gain of NAT over US in resectable PC. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing survival outcomes between NAT and US for resectable PC until June 2018. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed according to treatment strategy (NAT versus US) and analytic methods (intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol analysis (PP)). In 14 studies, 2,699 and 6,992 patients were treated with NAT and US, respectively. Although PP analysis showed the survival gain of NAT (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.68-0.76), ITT analysis did not show the statistical significance (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82-1.12). However, NAT completed with subsequent surgery showed better survival over US completed with adjuvant therapy (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.93). In conclusion, the supporting evidence for NAT in resectable PC was insufficient because the benefit was not demonstrated in ITT analysis. However, among the patients who completed both surgery and chemotherapy, NAT showed survival benefit over adjuvant therapy. Therefore, NAT could have a role of triaging the patients for surgery even in resectable PC.

Meta-analysis of the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on patterns of recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy may increase the rate of radical tumour resection in patients with pancreatic cancer. Its impact on tumour recurrence has not been investigated fully. This study aimed to assess the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on patterns of recurrence.

Methods

A systematic review was performed of articles identified through the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, Ovid and Google Scholar databases that analysed the relationship between neoadjuvant therapy and recurrence published to January 2016. The main endpoint was overall tumour recurrence. Other endpoints included local recurrence, any kind of distant, hepatic, pulmonary or peritoneal metastasis.

Results

A total of 4257 citations were reviewed. Twelve observational studies comprising 1365 patients were analysed. Neoadjuvant therapy significantly reduced the risk of overall (risk ratio (RR) 0·82, 95 per cent c.i. 0·74 to 0·90; P < 0·001) and local (RR 0·42, 0·32 to 0·55; P < 0·001) recurrence. Neoadjuvant therapy did not reduce the risk of any kind of distant (RR 1·02, 0·91 to 1·14; P = 0·78), hepatic (RR 0·86, 0·68 to 1·10; P = 0·23), pulmonary (RR 0·99, 0·37 to 2·66; P = 0·98) or peritoneal (RR 0·88, 0·57 to 1·38; P = 0·58) metastasis.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant therapy reduced the risk of local recurrence but not that of distant metastasis.

The impact of neoadjuvant therapy on the histopathological features of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to increased rates of curative tumor resections exceeding 60% after FOLFIRINOX-treatment, neoadjuvant therapy/NTx is increasingly recognized as an effective therapy option for downstaging borderline or locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/PDAC. Yet, the effects of NTx on the common histopathological features of PDAC have not been systematically analysed. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to assess the impact of NTx on relevant histopathological features of PDAC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Biomedical databases were systematically screened for predefined searching terms related to NTx and PDAC. The Preferred-Reporting-Items-for-Systematic-review-and-Meta-Analysis/PRISMA-guidelines were used to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles meeting the predefined criteria were analysed on relevance, and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 9031 studies could be identified that analysed the effect of NTx on PDAC. Only 35 studies presented comparative data on the histological features of neoadjuvantly treated vs. upfront resected PDAC patients. In meta-analyses, the beneficial effect of NTx was reflected by reduced tumor size (T1/2: RR 2.87, 95%-CI: 1.52-5.42, P=0.001, T3/4: RR 0.78, 95%-CI: 0.69-0.89, P=0.0002), lower N-Stage (N0: RR 2.14, 95%-CI: 1.85-2.46, P<0.00001, N1: RR 0.59, 95%-CI: 0.53-0.65, P<0.00001), higher R0-rates (R0: RR 1.13, 95%-CI: 1.08-1.18, P<0.00001, R1: RR 0.66, 95%-CI: 0.58-0.76, P<0.00001), less perineural invasion (Pn1: RR 0.78, 95%-CI: 0.73-0.83, P<0.00001), less lymphatic vessel invasion (RR: 0.50, 95%-CI: 0.36-0.70, P<0.0001) and fewer G3-tumors (RR 0.82, 95%-CI: 0.71-0.94, P=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

NTx in PDAC seems to exert its beneficial effect in borderline or locally advanced PDAC over genuine tumor downstaging. Thus, although at least 40% of all NTx treated patients remain unresectable even with modern NTx regimes, neoadjuvantly treated PDAC showed not only increasing resectability rates especially after FOLFIRINOX, but even reach a lower tumor stage than primarily resected PDAC.

Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of the pancreas: a retrospective study of 1000 cases

INTRODUCTION

Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) has emerged as a superior method for the diagnosis of pancreatic tumors. Very few large studies have been published. We retrospectively examined 1000 cases to determine the sensitivity and specificity of EUS-guided FNA for solid and cystic lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

EUS-guided FNA was performed in 1000 patients. Air-dried aspirates were reviewed immediately to ensure adequacy, and ethanol-fixed aspirates were reviewed the following day. The rendered diagnoses were placed into various categories and compared to subsequent histologic and clinical follow-up data.

RESULTS

Of the 1000 cases, 579 were solid lesions. The FNA diagnoses of the solid lesions were benign (B) 229 (39.5%), atypia (A) 22 (3.8%), suspicious (S) 27 (4.7%), malignant (M) 260 (44.9%), tumor (T) 1 (0.2%), and nondiagnostic (ND) 40 (6.9%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value for solid lesions were 97%, 97%, 99%, and 94%, respectively. There were 421 cystic lesions. The FNAs of the cystic lesions were classified as follows: B 342 (81.2%), A 5 (1.2%), S 4 (1%), M 7 (1.7%), T 46 (10.9%), and ND 17 (4.0%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value to identify mucinous tumors and malignancy for cystic lesions were 46%, 98%, 94%, and 87%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

At our institution, EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic lesions is both sensitive and specific for the diagnosis of both primary and metastatic tumors. For cystic lesions, FNA is not as sensitive, but its specificity remains high.