Prophylactic total pancreatectomy in individuals at high risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PROPAN): systematic review and shared decision-making programme using decision tables

Surgical aspects related to hereditary pancreatic cancer

The goal of surveillance programs for individuals at risk (IAR) from familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) families or families with other inherited tumor syndromes predisposing to the development of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC), such as hereditary pancreatitis or Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, is the dectection and consecutive curative resection of early PDAC or even better its high-grade precursor lesions. Although the indication for surgery is quite established, the extent of surgery is not well defined due to the lack of evidence-based data. In addition, multiple factors have to be taken into account to determine an optimal personalized surgical strategy. This holds especially true since pancreatic surgery is associated with a relatively high morbidity and might impair the quality of life significantly. In this article the surgical aspects in the setting of hereditary PDAC are discussed.

Pancreatic head cancer - Current surgery techniques

Pancreatic head cancer is a highly fatal disease. For now, surgery offers the only potential long-term cure albeit with a high risk of complications. However, the progress of surgical technique during the past decade has resulted in 5-year survival approaching 30% after resection and adjuvant chemotherapy. This paper presents current data on the recommended extent of lymphadenectomy, the resection margin, on the definition of resectable and borderline resectable tumors and mesopancreas. Surgical techniques proposed to improve PD are presented: the artery first approach, the uncinate process first, the mesopancreas first approach, the triangle operation, periarterial divestment, and multiorgan resection.

Pancreatic Tumorigenesis: Precursors, Genetic Risk Factors and Screening

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly malignant and aggressive tumor. Despite medical advancement, the silent nature of PC results in only 20% of all cases considered resectable at the time of diagnosis. It is projected to become the second leading cause in 2030. Most pancreatic cancer cases are diagnosed in the advanced stages. Such cases are typically unresectable and are associated with a 5-year survival of less than 10%. Although there is no guideline consensus regarding recommendations for screening for pancreatic cancer, early detection has been associated with better outcomes. In addition to continued utilization of imaging and conventional tumor markers, clinicians should be aware of novel testing modalities that may be effective for early detection of pancreatic cancer in individuals with high-risk factors. The pathogenesis of PC is not well understood; however, various modifiable and non-modifiable factors have been implicated in pancreatic oncogenesis. PC detection in the earlier stages is associated with better outcomes; nevertheless, most oncological societies do not recommend universal screening as it may result in a high false-positive rate. Therefore, targeted screening for high-risk individuals represents a reasonable option. In this review, we aimed to summarize the pathogenesis, genetic risk factors, high-risk population, and screening modalities for PC.

Total pancreatectomy with intraportal islet autotransplantation for pancreatic malignancies: a literature overview

INTRODUCTION

'Brittle Diabetes' (BD) is a life-threatening metabolic complication after total pancreatectomy (TP). More than 500 Intraportal islet autotransplantation (IAT) have been performed to prevent this complication, with almost 70% insulin independence after 3 years. Even when insulin independence was not achieved, IAT successfully prevented severe hypoglycemia. Currently, preliminary results for oncologic situations are promising, but their oncological outcomes are still a matter of debate.

AREAS COVERED

We performed a bibliographic research of the last 25 years of data. Articles published in English in peer-reviewed journals were retained. In France, auto- and allo-islet transplantation was recently recognized as a valuable treatment for BD by the national health authority. While accepted for benign diseases, the risk of tumor spreading after IAT in oncologic situations is a source of concern.

EXPERT OPINION

Preliminary results of IAT in oncological situations are very encouraging. So far, there is no evidence of tumor dissemination. In our opinion, to overcome BD TP with IAT for resectable pancreatic malignancies in patients with a higher risk of postoperative pancreatic fistula and extended pancreatic cancers can be safely performed. Diagnosis of malignancy should not be considered as an exclusion criterion for IAT.

Hereditary pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is associated with both family and hereditary cancer syndromes. Multigene panel testing for pancreatic cancer detected the germline variants BRCA1/2, PALB2, ATM, TP53, MLH1, STK11/LKB1, APC, CDKN2A, and SPINK1/PRSS1 as high-risk genes. A latest genome-wide association study revealed the common, but low-risk germline variants in pancreatic cancer patients. Active pancreatic surveillance using magnetic resonance imaging and endoscopic ultrasound is recommended for high-risk individuals who have a family history of pancreatic cancer or harbor these germline pathogenic variants to improve the detection rate and prognosis of pancreatic cancer. Since poly-ADP-ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitor has been shown to be effective in improving the prognosis of BRCA-positive pancreatic cancer as well as hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome, PARP inhibitor therapy is currently being applied as precision medicine to pancreatic cancer patients harboring the BRCA1/2 germline variant. This review highlights the importance of surveillance for germline pathogenic variants in pancreatic cancer and is expected to lead to improvements in the diagnosis and prevention of pancreatic cancer as well as facilitate the development of effective therapeutic strategies and precision medicine.

The use and clinical outcome of total pancreatectomy in the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden

BACKGROUND

Total pancreatectomy has high morbidity and mortality and differences among countries are currently unknown. This study compared the use and postoperative outcomes of total pancreatectomy among 4 Western countries.

METHODS

Patients who underwent one-stage total pancreatectomy were included from registries in the United States, Germany, the Netherlands, and Sweden (2014-2018). Use of total pancreatectomy was assessed by calculating the ratio total pancreatectomy to pancreatoduodenectomy. Primary outcomes were major morbidity (Clavien Dindo ≥3) and in-hospital mortality. Predictors for the primary outcomes were assessed in multivariable logistic regression analyses. Sensitivity analysis assessed the impact of volume (low-volume <40 or high-volume ≥40 pancreatoduodenectomies annually; data available for the Netherlands and Germany).

RESULTS

In total, 1,579 patients underwent one-stage total pancreatectomy. The relative use of total pancreatectomy to pancreatoduodenectomy varied up to fivefold (United States 0.03, Germany 0.15, the Netherlands 0.03, and Sweden 0.15; P < .001). Both the indication and several baseline characteristics differed significantly among countries. Major morbidity occurred in 423 patients (26.8%) and differed (22.3%, 34.9%, 38.3%, and 15.9%, respectively; P < .001). In-hospital mortality occurred in 85 patients (5.4%) and also differed (1.8%, 10.2%, 10.8%, 1.9%, respectively; P < .001). Country, age ≥75, and vascular resection were predictors for in-hospital mortality. In-hospital mortality was lower in high-volume centers in the Netherlands (4.9% vs 23.1%; P = .002), but not in Germany (9.8% vs 10.6%; P = .733).

CONCLUSION

Considerable differences in the use of total pancreatectomy, patient characteristics, and postoperative outcome were noted among 4 Western countries with better outcomes in the United States and Sweden. These large, yet unexplained, differences require further research to ultimately improve patient outcome.