Surveillance of Cystic Lesions of the Pancreas: Whom and How to Survey?

Liquid biopsy in pancreatic cancer - Current perspective and future outlook

Pancreatic cancer is a lethal condition with a rising incidence and often presents at an advanced stage, contributing to abysmal five-year survival rates. Unspecific symptoms and the current lack of biomarkers and screening tools hamper early diagnosis. New technologies for liquid biopsies and their respective evaluation in pancreatic cancer patients have emerged over recent years. The term liquid biopsy summarizes the sampling and analysis of circulating tumor cells (CTCs), small extracellular vesicles (sEVs), and tumor DNA (ctDNA) from body fluids. The major advantages of liquid biopsies rely on their minimal invasiveness and repeatability, allowing serial sampling for dynamic insights to aid diagnosis, particularly early detection, risk stratification, and precision medicine in pancreatic cancer. However, liquid biopsies have not yet developed into a new pillar for clinicians' routine armamentarium. Here, we summarize recent findings on the use of liquid biopsy in pancreatic cancer patients. We discuss current challenges and future perspectives of this potentially powerful alternative to conventional tissue biopsies.

Improving diagnostic accuracy and appropriate indications for surgery in pancreatic cystic neoplasms: the role of EUS

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) represent a difficult preoperative diagnosis despite improvements in imaging. In this study, we compared preoperative and final pathologic diagnosis in a large cohort of resected PCNs, evaluating diagnostic accuracy with a specific focus on the value of EUS.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing resection between 2009 and 2019 for presumed PCNs was performed. Preoperative workup was reviewed by analyzing the role of imaging and EUS. Patients with a benign histology who did not show absolute indication were categorized as "delayable surgery."

RESULTS

Of 585 patients who were retrospectively analyzed, in 108 (18.5%) final histology did not confirm preoperative diagnosis. EUS was associated with a lower rate of incorrect diagnosis (16%; P = .03), but the risk of overtreatment was similar regardless of instrumental diagnostic path (33/131 vs 68/328, P = .298). Dilatation of the main pancreatic duct and cytologic sampling were the only variables independently associated with a correct diagnosis (P < .001 and P = .041, respectively). Based on clinical presentation and final histology, pancreatic resection could have been spared or delayed in 101 of 459 patients (22%), and this was influenced by age (odds ratio [OR], .97; P = .002), cyst larger than 30 mm (OR, 1.89; P = .005), and type of operation (OR, 3.46 [P < .001] and 3.18 [P = .023] for distal pancreatectomies and other resections, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall risk of unnecessary immediate surgery for PCNs is about 22% in a high-volume referral center. EUS with cytologic sampling is a useful procedure in the diagnostic management of PCNs, improving their diagnostic accuracy.

The faith of non-surveilled pancreatic cysts: a bicentric retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Incidental discovery of pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCLs) is a common and steadily increasing occurrence. The aim of this study was to investigate a cohort of patients presenting with incidentally detected PCLs which were not included in a surveillance protocol, and to compare their risk of malignant evolution with that of systematically surveilled lesions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A population of PCLs which did not receive surveillance over a period >10 years (population A) was selected at the Medical University of Vienna. A group of "low risk" branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm ≤15 mm in size upon diagnosis undergoing a regular follow-up of at least 5 years at the University of Verona was selected as control (population B). The incidence of pancreatic cancer (PC), cumulative risk of PC and disease-specific survival were compared.

RESULTS

Overall, 376 patients with non-surveilled PCLs were included in study group A and compared to 299 patients in group B. This comparison resulted in similar incidence rates of PC (1.6% vs 1.7%, p = 0.938), a strong similarity in terms of disease-specific mortality rates (1.3% vs 0.3%, p = 0.171) and the 5- and 10-year cumulative risk of PC (≅ 1% and 2%, p = 0.589) and DSS (≅ 100% and 98%, p = 0.050).

CONCLUSION

The "price to pay" for a negligence-based policy in the population of non-surveilled PCLs was reasonable, and the incidence of PC was comparable to that reported for a population of low-risk cysts enrolled to a standardized surveillance protocol.

Accuracy of Fukuoka and American Gastroenterological Association Guidelines for Predicting Advanced Neoplasia in Pancreatic Cyst Neoplasm: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

A differential diagnosis of advanced pancreatic cystic neoplasms (PCNs) is critical to determine optimal treatment. The Fukuoka and American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) guidelines are the most widely accepted criteria for the management of PCNs.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic value of these guidelines in predicting advanced neoplasia (AN).

METHODS

A comprehensive electronic search of the PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases was conducted to identify all relevant studies evaluating the Fukuoka and AGA guidelines in surgically resected and histologically confirmed PCNs. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were calculated as compound measures of diagnostic accuracy using the random-effects model. Summary of receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curves and the area under the curve (AUC) were also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 21 studies with 3723 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Of these studies, 15, 4, and 2 evaluated the Fukuoka guidelines, the AGA guidelines, and both guidelines, respectively. For AN prediction, the Fukuoka guidelines had a pooled sensitivity of 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.64-0.70), pooled specificity of 0.64 (95% CI 0.62-0.66), and pooled DOR of 6.28 (95% CI 4.38-9.01), with an AUC of the SROC of 0.78. AGA guidelines showed a pooled sensitivity of 0.59 (95% CI 0.52-0.65), pooled specificity of 0.77 (95% CI 0.74-0.80), and pooled DOR of 5.84 (95% CI 2.60-13.15), with an AUC of 0.79 (95% CI 0.70-0.88).

CONCLUSION

When used alone, the Fukuoka and AGA guidelines showed similar but unsatisfactory diagnostic accuracy in the risk stratification of malignant potential of PCN. Thus, we recommend that they be applied only as a broad framework in clinical practice.