A multi-institutional phase II trial of preoperative full-dose gemcitabine and concurrent radiation for patients with potentially resectable pancreatic carcinoma

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.

Pancreatic Cancer: A Review of Current Treatment and Novel Therapies

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes for cancer-related deaths in the United States. Majority of patients present with unresectable or metastatic disease. For those that present with localized disease, a multidisciplinary approach is necessary to maximize survival and optimize outcomes. The quality and safety of surgery for pancreatic cancer have improved in recent years with increasing adoption of minimally invasive techniques and surgical adjuncts. Systemic chemotherapy has also evolved to impact survival. It is now increasingly being utilized in the neoadjuvant setting, often with concomitant radiation. Increased utilization of genomic testing in metastatic pancreatic cancer has led to better understanding of their biology, thereby allowing clinicians to consider potential targeted therapies. Similarly, targeted agents such as PARP inhibitors and immune checkpoint- inhibitors have emerged with promising results. In summary, pancreatic cancer remains a disease with poor long-term survival. However, recent developments have led to improved outcomes and have changed practice in the past decade. This review summarizes current practices in pancreatic cancer treatment and the milestones that brought us to where we are today, along with emerging therapies.

Role of neoadjuvant therapy for nonmetastatic pancreatic cancer: Current evidence and future perspectives

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most common and lethal human cancers worldwide. Surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy offers the best chance of a long-term survival for patients with PDAC, although only approximately 20% of the patients have resectable tumors when diagnosed. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) is recommended for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Several studies have investigated the role of NACT in treating resectable tumors based on the recent advances in PDAC biology, as NACT provides the potential benefit of selecting patients with favorable tumor biology and controls potential micro-metastases in high-risk patients with resectable PDAC. In such challenging cases, new potential tools, such as ct-DNA and molecular targeted therapy, are emerging as novel therapeutic options that may improve old paradigms. This review aims to summarize the current evidence regarding the role of NACT in treating non-metastatic pancreatic cancer while focusing on future perspectives in light of recent evidence.

Estimation of the organ of origin of peri-ampullary malignancy by preoperative CT scan

BACKGROUND

Tumors occurring within the pancreatic head commonly arise from the pancreas, duodenal ampulla, distal bile duct, or duodenum. However, they are difficult to distinguish on standard preoperative imaging.

PURPOSE

To assess the ability of specialist reporting of preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans to determine the organ of origin of pancreatic cancer (PC).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Blinded re-reporting of preoperative imaging from five hospitals was undertaken of a consecutive cohort of 411 patients undergoing surgery for PC between January 2006 and May 2014. Radiological identification of tumor site was determined by the presence of the main tumor bulk within the pancreatic head parenchyma and estimation of the pathological organ of origin of the PC was based on all the reported features.

RESULTS

Each pathological tumor type was noted to have distinct radiological features. Localization of a visible tumor within the pancreatic parenchyma was seen most commonly in PC (92%) than other tumor types (P < 0.0001). Local invasion into the duodenum was a characteristic feature seen in 79% of patients with ampullary tumors and isolated dilation of the bile duct without dilation of the pancreatic duct was seen most commonly in patients with ampullary or bile duct cancer. In the assessment of tumor origin, good agreement (kappa = 0.6, 0.51-0.68) was noted between the consensus radiology opinion and the final histology result. Overall accuracy was greatest for ampullary cancer (88.1%) and lowest for PC (83.2%).

CONCLUSION

Radiological assessment of preoperative imaging provides a high degree of accuracy in predicting the organ of origin of peri-ampullary cancer.

Use and outcomes from neoadjuvant chemotherapy in borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in an Australasian population

BACKGROUND

Use of neoadjuvant (NA) chemotherapy is recommended when pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is borderline resectable METHOD: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with localized PDAC between January 2016 and March 2019 within the Australasian Pancreatic Cancer Registry (PURPLE, Pancreatic cancer: Understanding Routine Practice and Lifting End results) was performed. Clinicopathological characteristics, treatment, and outcome were analyzed. Overall survival (OS) comparison was performed using log-rank model and Kaplan-Meier analysis.

RESULTS

The PURPLE database included 754 cases with localised PDAC, including 148 (20%) cases with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). Of the 148 BRPC patients, 44 (30%) underwent immediate surgery, 80 (54%) received NA chemotherapy, and 24 (16%) were inoperable. The median age of NA therapy patients was 63 years and FOLFIRINOX (53%) was more often used as NA therapy than gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (31%). Patients who received FOLFIRINOX were younger than those who received gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (60 years vs. 67 years, p = .01). Surgery was performed in 54% (43 of 80) of BRPC patients receiving NA chemotherapy, with 53% (16 of 30) achieving R0 resections. BRPC patients undergoing surgery had a median OS of 30 months, and 38% (9 of 24) achieved R0 resection. NA chemotherapy patients had a median OS of 20 months, improving to 24 months versus 10 months for patients receiving FOLFIRINOX compared to gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (Hazard Ratio (HR) .3, p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

NA chemotherapy use in BRPC is increasing in Australia. One half of patients receiving NA chemotherapy proceed to curative resection, with 53% achieving R0 resections. Patients receiving Infusional 5-flurouracil, Irinotecan and Oxaliplatin (FOLIRINOX) had increased survival than gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Treatment strategies are being explored in the MASTERPLAN and DYNAMIC-Pancreas trials.

Is neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for pancreatic cancer beneficial: A systematic review and meta-analysis

To examine the potential benefits and adverse events of neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy (CRT) versus upfront surgery in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients. Extensive librarian-led literature searches were conducted on PubMed, Web-of-Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, the Cochrane Central Library and Embase. The primary outcomes were resectability, adverse events, pathological and survival outcomes. Five studies, including 437 participants, were analyzed. Upfront surgery had a significantly higher resectability among PC patients than neoadjuvant CRT group (Odds ratio = -0.11, 95% CI = -0.19-0.02, P = 0.01). The neoadjuvant CRT group had a comparatively higher Ro resection rate (OR = 3.38, 95% CI = 2.03-5.62, P < 0.01), fewer severe adverse events(OR = 0.56, 95% CI = 0.34-0.92, P = 0.02), lower positive LN rate(OR = 0.18, 95% CI = 0.11-0.31, P < 0.01) and higher 2-year OS(OR = 1.60, 95% CI = 1.02-2.52, P = 0.04) among PC patients than control group. There was no significant difference between neoadjuvant CRT and upfront surgery among PC patients on postoperative complications(OR = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.86-2.57, P = 0.16), metastasis rate(OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.42-4.18, P = 0.64) and 1-year OS(OR = 1.30, 95% CI = 0.85-1.98, P = 0.22). This systematic review confirmed the status of neoadjuvant CRT in the PC treatment. The neoadjuvant CRT could increase the R0 resection rate, which was important to the survival and life quality of patients. The specific choice of various neoadjuvant CRT therapy needs to be further studied. Individualized neoadjuvant therapy should be suitable for each patient, and patients with PC are best managed by a multidisciplinary team.

Neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: A promising curative method to improve prognosis

Currently, 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been designed to investigate whether neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) benefits patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (R-PA) compared to surgery alone. Five of them have acquired results so far; however, corresponding conclusions have not been obtained. We speculated that the reason for this phenomenon could be that some prognostic factors had proven to be adverse through upfront surgery curative patterns, but some of them were not regarded as independent baseline characteristics, which is important to obtaining comparability between the NAT and upfront surgery groups. This fact could cause bias and lead to the difference in the outcomes of RCTs. In this review, we collate data about risk factors (such as tumor size, resection margin, and lymph node status) influencing the prognoses of patients with R-PA from five RCTs and discuss the possible reasons for the varying outcomes.

Defining the Optimal Duration of Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Time for a Personalized Approach?

ABSTRACT

Despite recent advances, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continues to be associated with dismal outcomes, with a cure evading most patients. While historic treatment for PDAC has been surgical resection followed by 6 months of adjuvant therapy, there has been a recent shift toward neoadjuvant treatment (NAT). Several considerations support this approach, including the characteristic early systemic spread of PDAC, and the morbidity often surrounding pancreatic resection, which can delay recovery and preclude patients from starting adjuvant treatment. The addition of NAT has been suggested to improve margin-negative resection rates, decrease lymph node positivity, and potentially translate to improved survival. Conversely, complications and disease progression can occur during preoperative treatment, potentially eliminating the chance of curative resection. As NAT utilization has increased, treatment durations have been found to vary widely between institutions with an optimal duration remaining undefined. In this review, we assess the existing literature on NAT for PDAC, reviewing treatment durations reported across retrospective case series and prospective clinical trials to establish currently used approaches and seek the optimal duration. We also analyze markers of treatment response and review the potential for personalized approaches that may help clarify this important treatment question and move NAT toward a more standardized approach.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Where Do We Go?

The incidence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been on the rise in recent years; however, its clinical diagnosis and treatment remain challenging. Although surgical resection remains the only chance for long-term patient survival, the likelihood of initial resectability is no higher than 20%. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in PDAC aims to transform the proportion of inoperable PDACs into operable cases and reduce the likelihood of recurrence to improve overall survival. Ongoing phase 3 clinical trial aims to validate the role of NAT in PDAC therapy, including prolongation of survival, increased R0 resection, and a higher proportion of negative lymph nodes. Controversies surrounding the role of NAT in PDAC treatment include applicability to different stages of PDAC, chemotherapy regimens, radiation, duration of treatment, and assessment of effect. This review aims to summarize the current progress and controversies of NAT in PDAC.

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.

Long-Term Outcome of Patients with Postoperative Refractory Diarrhea After Tailored Nerve Plexus Dissection Around the Major Visceral Arteries During Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

For pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) surgery, extended dissection of the nerve plexus (pl) around the superior mesenteric artery (SMA) or celiac artery (CA) is sometimes necessary. This consequently results in postoperative refractory diarrhea. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical impact of extended nerve plexus dissection around major arteries on postoperative diarrhea.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for PDAC between January 2013 and December 2016 were included. The frequency of diarrhea (defined as a condition requiring opioid antidiarrheal drug for at least 6 months after surgery) and its short- and long-term outcomes were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of 200 consecutive patients who underwent PD, 78 (39.0%) developed postoperative refractory diarrhea (diarrhea group), and 73 of them (93.6%) underwent hemi-circumferential or more nerve dissection for SMA or CA; both plSMA and plCA dissection were associated with diarrhea. Borderline resectable artery (BR-A) PDAC was included more in the diarrhea group (32.0% vs. 13.1%, P = 0.001); however, the local recurrence rate in the diarrhea group was significantly lower than that in the non-diarrhea group (14.1% vs. 26.2%, P = 0.036). The completion of adjuvant chemotherapy and overall survival were comparable between the two groups. The pre-albumin level improved in 2 years, and 61.3% of patients with diarrhea could stop opioid antidiarrheal drugs within 3 years of surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the frequency of diarrhea increased following nerve plexus dissection around arteries, diarrhea was controllable and resulted in a reduced local recurrence rate. Aggressive dissection of the nerve plexus may be justified for local disease control in BR-A PDAC.

Current Controversies in Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Over the last two decades, there have been significant changes in the management of patients with localized pancreatic cancer. The rationale for an evolution toward a neoadjuvant approach and summary of relevant clinical trials is reviewed. Controversies in identifying optimal neoadjuvant therapeutic approaches are discussed.

Advances in neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer over the past two decades

In the last two decades, pancreatic cancer has been undergoing important changes in its perioperative management due to the great interest in multidisciplinary management and preoperative multimodal therapy, which in numerous studies have shown promising clinical results. Although the standard of treatment for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) today is surgery followed by adjuvant therapy, as it is a biologically aggressive disease, even with complete resection, it has high rates of local and distant relapse. Several retrospective and prospective phase I/II studies have opened the window for neoadjuvant therapy with chemotherapy (CT), chemoradiotherapy (CRT), or both, as an alternative treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer, with promising results. Neoadjuvant therapy could has some advantages, including early administration of systemic treatment, in vivo assessment of response to treatment, increase resectability rate in borderline patients, increase resection rate with negative margin and survival benefit. While it seems clear that even potentially resectable disease would benefit from preoperative multimodal therapy, the optimal neoadjuvant therapeutic strategy is still controversial and currently there are only recommendations for neoadjuvant treatment, in clinical guidelines such as the NCCN and ESMO, for borderline and/or locally advanced PDAC. This review provides an overview of recent studies available and how they relate to systemic treatment of resectable PDAC in the neoadjuvant setting.

Patterns of Failure After Neoadjuvant Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy or Fractionated Chemoradiation in Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

The goal of this study was to compare outcomes of patients with borderline and resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) versus fractionated chemoradiation.

METHODS

Patients with borderline or resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant intent between November 2011 and December 2017 were reviewed. The SBRT volume/dose was 33 Gy in 5 fractions to gross tumor plus abutting vessel with or without 25 Gy in 5 fractions to pancreatic head/body and celiac/superior mesenteric artery. Fractionated chemoradiation volume/dose was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions to gross tumor, superior mesenteric/celiac arteries, and enlarged lymph nodes with concurrent bolus 5-FU, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, irinotecan or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel. Failure patterns, local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival were assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-three patients were reviewed (18 SBRTs and 25 fractionated). Among patients who underwent resection, patients treated with fractionated chemoradiation had improved LRFS (12-month LRFS, 86% vs 62%, P = 0.003) and PFS (median PFS, 23 months vs 11 months, P = 0.006) compared with SBRT. There was no difference in overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

Stereotactic body radiation therapy may result in inferior LRFS and PFS compared with fractionated chemoradiation, likely because of under coverage of high-risk vascular targets.

The Impact of Prolonged Chemotherapy to Surgery Interval and Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy on Pathological Complete Response and Overall Survival in Pancreatic Cancer Patients

Background:

We aimed to study the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to surgery (NCT-S) interval and neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NRT) on pathological complete response (pCR) and overall survival (OS) in pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma [PDAC]).

Methods:

National Cancer Data Base (NCDB)–pancreatectomy patients who underwent NCT/NRT were included. The NCT-S interval was divided into time quintiles in weeks: 8 to 11, 12 to 14, 15 to 19, 20 to 29, and >29 weeks.

Results:

A total of 2093 patients with NCT were included with median follow-up of 74 months and 71% NRT. The pCR rate was 2.1% with higher median OS compared with non-pCR (41 vs 19 months, P = .03). The pCR rate increased with longer NCT-S interval (quintiles: 1%, 1.6%, 1.7%, 3%, and 6%, P < .001, respectively). In logistic regression, NRT (odds ratio [OR] = 2.5, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.1-6.1, P = .03) and NCT-S >29 weeks (OR = 6.1, 95% CI = 2.02-18.50, P < .001) were predictive of increased pCR. The prolonged NCT-S interval and pCR were independent predictors of OS, whereas NRT was not.

Conclusions:

Longer NCT-S interval and pCR were independent predictors of improved OS in patients with PDAC. The NRT predicted increased pCR but not OS.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

The prognosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is dismal. Hence, advances in multidisciplinary treatment strategies, including surgery, are urgently needed. Early recurrence of distant organ metastases suggests that there are occult metastases even in cases with resectable disease. Several randomized controlled trials on adjuvant chemotherapy have been conducted to prolong survival after resection. CONKO-001 study was the first to demonstrate significant improvement in disease-free survival after surgery with gemcitabine administration. The JASPAC-01 study showed the superiority of adjuvant S1 over gemcitabine in survival after resection. Based on the results, adjuvant S1 therapy is the prescribed standard of care in Japan. Recently, the PRODIGE 24/CCTG PA.6 study showed that survival of patients treated with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen as adjuvant therapy was significantly longer than those treated with adjuvant gemcitabine therapy. Although the evidence from these trials on adjuvant chemotherapy have been the gold-standard treatment for curatively resected and fully recovered patients, resectable disease at diagnosis is not the status, resected disease after curative resection. Currently, neoadjuvant therapy is considered to be a promising alternative to surgery for pancreatic cancer. Although there are many reports regarding neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, so far there has been no solid evidence proving the advantage of this strategy versus standard up-front surgery. Newly obtained results from the Prep-02/JSAP05 randomized phase II/III study, comparing neoadjuvant therapy with up-front surgery, revealed significant improvement in overall survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy by intention-to-treat analysis. Thus, neoadjuvant intervention might become a new standard strategy in cases undergoing planned resection for pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: What is the best protocol?

Although upfront surgery has been the gold standard for pancreatic adenocarcinoma that is planned for resection, it should be compared with the alternative strategy of neoadjuvant therapy. Despite the many reports of the efficacy of neoadjuvant therapy, most of them were not comparative. Recently Prep-02/JSAP05 study clearly demonstrated the significant survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy over upfront surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma that is planned for resection. These findings opened a new chapter of neoadjuvant therapy. Ongoing trials are expected to confirm the evidence. This review summarizes the past, present, and future perspectives of neoadjuvant therapy and its optimization.

Neoadjuvant Treatment in Pancreatic Cancer

Thanks to the development of modern chemotherapeutic regimens, survival after surgery for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has improved and pancreatologists worldwide agree that the treatment of PDAC demands a multidisciplinary approach. Neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) plays a major role in the treatment of PDAC since only about 20% of patients are considered resectable at the time of diagnosis. Moreover, increasing data demonstrating the benefits of NAT for borderline resectable/locally advanced PDAC are driving a shift from up-front surgery to NAT in the multidisciplinary treatment of even resectable PDAC. Our understanding of the role of NAT in PDAC has evolved from tumor shrinkage to controlling potential micrometastases and selecting patients who may benefit from radical resection. The present review gives an overview on the current literature of NAT concepts for BR/LA PDAC and resectable PDAC.

Preoperative Chemoradiotherapy Versus Immediate Surgery for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Results of the Dutch Randomized Phase III PREOPANC Trial

PURPOSE

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy may improve the radical resection rate for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but the overall benefit is unproven.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this randomized phase III trial in 16 centers, patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy, which consisted of 3 courses of gemcitabine, the second combined with 15 × 2.4 Gy radiotherapy, followed by surgery and 4 courses of adjuvant gemcitabine or to immediate surgery and 6 courses of adjuvant gemcitabine. The primary end point was overall survival by intention to treat.

RESULTS

Between April 2013 and July 2017, 246 eligible patients were randomly assigned; 119 were assigned to preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 127 to immediate surgery. Median overall survival by intention to treat was 16.0 months with preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 14.3 months with immediate surgery (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.05; P = .096). The resection rate was 61% and 72% (P = .058). The R0 resection rate was 71% (51 of 72) in patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy and 40% (37 of 92) in patients assigned to immediate surgery (P < .001). Preoperative chemoradiotherapy was associated with significantly better disease-free survival and locoregional failure-free interval as well as with significantly lower rates of pathologic lymph nodes, perineural invasion, and venous invasion. Survival analysis of patients who underwent tumor resection and started adjuvant chemotherapy showed improved survival with preoperative chemoradiotherapy (35.2 v 19.8 months; P = .029). The proportion of patients who suffered serious adverse events was 52% versus 41% (P = .096).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative chemoradiotherapy for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer did not show a significant overall survival benefit. Although the outcomes of the secondary end points and predefined subgroup analyses suggest an advantage of the neoadjuvant approach, additional evidence is required.

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.

Phase 2 Trial of Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy Concurrent With Fixed-Dose Rate-Gemcitabine in Patients With Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

PURPOSE

Preoperative therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is intended to increase R0 resection rates. An optimal approach in BRPC is yet to be defined.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Patients with BRPC, confirmed adenocarcinoma, performance status ≤1, and adequate organ function enrolled in a single-institution, phase 2 trial. Patients received FOLFIRINOX × 6 cycles, then radiation therapy (50 Gy in 25 fractions) concurrent with fixed-dose rate gemcitabine (1 g/m2 over 100 minutes) followed by 2 additional gemcitabine infusions. Computed tomography scans were performed at 2-month intervals during treatment. Patients without distant disease were offered surgical exploration. The primary objective was R0 resection rate with an alternate hypothesis of 55%. Secondary objectives included median progression-free survival (PFS), median overall survival (OS), response rate, and safety. The trial registration number is NCT01661088.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients with median age of 60 years (range, 47-77 years) enrolled from November 2011 through January 2017. Twenty-one (84%) completed FOLFIRINOX and 19 (76%) completed all protocol therapy. Treatment-related grade 3 to 4 toxicities included neutropenia (40%), nausea and vomiting (28%), diarrhea (16%), and fatigue (12%). Eighteen patients (72%) underwent laparotomy, 13 (52%) were resected (all R0). The median PFS and OS in 25 patients were 13.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 7.3-24.7) and 24.4 months (95% CI, 12.6-40.0), respectively. For resected patients, median PFS was 21.6 months (95% CI, 8.2-37.1) and OS was 37.1 months (95% CI, 15.4-not reached).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant therapy with FOLFIRINOX, followed by intensity modulated radiation therapy concurrent with fixed-dose-rate gemcitabine in BRPC is feasible and tolerated. Although the alternate hypothesis was not met, the OS of the resected cohort was favorable.

Primarily resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma - to operate or to refer the patient to an oncologist?

The aim of this work is to investigate the optimal therapeutic sequence of resectable pancreatic cancer - primary surgery with adjuvant therapy or neoadjuvant followed by resection. Application of the neoadjuvant approach in routine treatment of pancreatic cancer is rapidly growing every year, despite the lack of final results from randomized trials. Recent advancements in the adjuvant therapy, due to the more effective chemotherapy regimens, favor the upfront surgery strategy. On the other hand, theoretical background and metaanalyses favor the neoadjuvant strategy. Currently, primary resection with adjuvant chemotherapy remains the standard approach in resectable pancreatic cancer, but the first recommendations considering the neoadjuvant approach as an option seem to arise among the scientific societies with a global impact. Preliminary results of Prodige 24 study and PREOPANC-1 trial demonstrates that both options are worth further evaluation in clinical trials. Their results should soon provide more answers to this important clinical questions.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy has emerged as an alternative treatment strategy for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. In the absence of large randomized controlled trials offering a direct comparison, this study aims to use Markov decision analysis to compare efficacy of traditional surgery first (SF) and neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer.

Methods

An advanced Markov decision analysis model was constructed to compare SF and NAT pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Transition probabilities were calculated from randomized control and Phase II/III trials after comprehensive literature search. Utility outcomes were measured in overall and quality-adjusted life months (QALMs) on an intention-to-treat basis as the primary outcome. Markov cohort analysis of treatment received was the secondary outcome. Model uncertainties were tested with one and two-way deterministic and probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis.

Results

SF gave 23.72 months (18.51 QALMs) versus 20.22 months (16.26 QALMs). Markov Cohort Analysis showed that where all treatment modalities were received NAT gave 35.05 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 30.96 months (24.86QALMs) for R0 resection and 34.08 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 25.85 months (20.72 QALMs) for R1 resection. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that NAT was superior if the resection rate was greater than 51.04% or below 75.68% in SF pathway. Two-way sensitivity analysis showed that pathway superiority depended on obtaining multimodal treatment in either pathway.

Conclusion

Whilst NAT is a viable alternative to traditional SF approach, superior pathway selection depends on the individual patient’s likelihood of receiving multimodal treatment in either pathway.

Outcomes after neoadjuvant treatment with gemcitabine and erlotinib followed by gemcitabine-erlotinib and radiotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer (GEMCAD 10-03 trial)

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients has shown promising results in non-randomized trials. This is a multi-institutional phase II trial of NAT in resectable PDAC patients.

METHODS

Patients with confirmed resectable PDAC after agreement by two expert radiologists were eligible. Patients received three cycles of GEM (1000 mg/m²/week) plus daily erlotinib (ERL) (100 mg/day). After re-staging, patients without progressive disease underwent 5 weeks of therapy with GEM (300 mg/m²/week), ERL 100 mg/day and concomitant radiotherapy (45 Gy). Efficacy was assessed using tumor regression grade (TRG) and resection margin status. Using a single-arm Simon's design, considering the therapy not useful if R0 < 40% and useful if the R0 > 70% (alpha 5%, beta 10%), 24 patients needed to be recruited. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01389440.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled. Adverse effects of NAT were mainly mild gastrointestinal disorders. Resectability rate was 76%, with a R0 rate of 63.1% among the resected patients. Median overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) were 23.8 (95% CI 11.4-36.2) and 12.8 months (95% CI 8.6-17.1), respectively. R0 resection patients had better median OS, compared with patients with R1 resection or not resected (65.5 months vs. 15.5 months, p = 0.01). N0 rate among the resected patients was 63.1%, and showed a longer median OS (65.5 vs. 15.2 months, p = 0.009).

CONCLUSION

The results of this study confirm promising oncologic results with NAT for patients with resectable PDAC. Therefore, the present trial supports the development of phase II randomized trials comparing NAT vs. upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer.

The Evolving Role of Radiation in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is an aggressive malignancy with a poor long-term survival and only mild improvement in outcomes over the past 30 years. Local failure remains a problem and radiation can help improve control. The role of radiation therapy in has been controversial and is still evolving. This article reviews the trials of pancreatic cancer and radiation in adjuvant, neoadjuvant, and unresectable lesions. The article reviews the impact and outcomes of evolving radiation technology.

Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer: Systematic Review of Postoperative Morbidity, Mortality, and Complications

The purpose of this review was to assess whether neoadjuvant chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy (CRT) result in differential postoperative morbidity and mortality as compared with pancreatic tumor resection surgery alone. Using PRISMA guidelines and the PubMed search engine, we reviewed all prospective phase II trials of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and CRT for pancreatic cancer that examined postoperative morbidities and mortalities. A total of 30 articles were identified, collated, and analyzed. Risks of postoperative complications vary based on trial. With surgery alone, the most common postoperative complications included delayed gastric emptying (DGE) (17% to 24%), pancreatic fistula (10% to 20%), anastomotic leaks (0% to 15%), postoperative bleeding (2% to 13%), and infections/sepsis (17% to 20%). With surgery alone, the mortality was <5%. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed comparable fistula rates (3% to 4%), leaks (3% to 11%), infection (3% to 7%), with mortality 0% to 4% in all but 1 study. CRT for resectable/borderline resectable patients also showed comparable complication rates: DGE (6% to 15%), fistulas (2% to 3%), leaks (3% to 7%), bleeding/hemorrhage (2% to 13%), infections/sepsis (3% to 19%), with 9/13 studies showing a mortality of ≤4%. As compared with initially borderline/resectable tumors, CRT for initially unresectable tumors (despite less data) showed higher complication rates: DGE (13% to 33%), fistulas (3% to 25%), infections/sepsis (3% to 16%). However, the confounding factor of the potentially higher tumor burden as an associative agent remains. The only parameters slightly higher than historical surgery-only complication rates were leaks and bleeding/hemorrhage (13% to 20%). Mortality rates in these patients were consistently 0%, with 2 outliers. Hence, neoadjuvant chemotherapy/CRT is safe from a postoperative complication standpoint, without significant increases in complication rates compared with surgery alone. Resectable and borderline resectable patients have fewer complications as compared with unresectable patients, although data for the latter are lacking.

Retrospective cohort analysis of neoadjuvant treatment and survival in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a high volume referral centre

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a deadly disease. Neoadjuvant therapy (NA) with chemotherapy (NAC) and radiotherapy (RT) prior to surgery provides promise. In the absence of prospective data, well annotated clinical data from high-volume units may provide pilot data for randomised trials.

METHODS

Medical records from a tertiary hospital in Sydney, Australia, were analysed to identify all patients with resectable or borderline resectable PDAC. Data regarding treatment, toxicity and survival were collected.

RESULTS

Between January 1 2010 and April 1 2016, 220 sequential patients were treated: 87 with NA and 133 with upfront operation (UO). Forty-three NA patients (52%) and 5 UO patients (4%) were borderline resectable at diagnosis. Twenty-four borderline patients received NA RT, 22 sequential to NAC. The median overall survival (OS) in the NA group was 25.9 months (mo); 95% CI (21.1-43.0 mo) compared to 26.9 mo (19.7, 32.7) in the UO; HR 0.89; log-ranked p-value = 0.58. Sixty-nine NA patients (79%) were resected, mOS was 29.2 mo (22.27, not reached (NR)). Twenty-two NA (31%) versus 22 UO (17%) were node negative at operation (N0). In those managed with NAC/RT the mOS was 29.0 mo (17.3, NR). There were no post-operative deaths with NA within 90-days and three in the UO arm.

DISCUSSION

This is a hypothesis generating retrospective review of a selected real-world population in a high-throughput unit. Treatment with NA was well tolerated. The long observed survival in this group may be explained by lymph node sterilisation by NA, and the achievement of R0 resection in a greater proportion of patients.

A Prospective Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant S-1 with Concurrent Hypofractionated Radiotherapy in Patients with Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The ideal neoadjuvant treatment protocol for patients with pancreatic cancer (PDAC) remains unclear. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant hypofractionated chemoradiotherapy with S-1 for patients with resectable (R) and borderline resectable (BR) PDAC.

METHODS

Eligibility criteria included patients with R and BR PDAC, performance status 0-1, and age 20-85 years. Hypofractionated external-beam radiotherapy (30 Gy in 10 fractions) with concurrent S-1 (60 mg/m²) was delivered 5 days/week for 2 weeks prior to pancreatectomy.

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients were enrolled in this study, including 33 R and 24 BR [19 BR tumors with portal vein contact (BR-PV) and 5 BR tumors with arterial contact (BR-A)]. The total rates of protocol treatment completion and resection were 91% (50/57) and 96% (55/57), respectively. Seven patients failed to complete S-1 due to cholangitis (n = 5) or neutropenia (n = 2). The most common grade 3 toxicities [Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0] were anorexia (7%), nausea (5%), neutropenia (4%), and leukopenia (4%). No patient experienced grade 4 toxicity. Pathologically negative margins (R0) were achieved in 54 of 55 patients (98%) who underwent pancreatectomy. Pathological response was classified as Evans grade I in 8 patients (15%), IIa in 31 patients (56%), IIb in 14 patients (25%), III in 1 patient (2%), and IV in 1 patient (2%), and operative morbidity (Clavien-Dindo grade IIIb or less) was observed in 4 patients (8%). The 1- and 2-year overall survival (OS) rates were 91 and 83% in R patients, respectively, and 77 and 58% in BR patients, respectively (p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

Neoadjuvant S-1 with concurrent hypofractionated radiotherapy is tolerable and appears promising for patients with R and BR PDAC.

Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies

There is a strong rationale and many theoretical advantages for neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic cancer (PC). However, study results have varied significantly. In this study, a systematic review and meta‐analysis of prospective studies were performed in order to evaluate safety and effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy in PC. Thirty‐nine studies were selected (n = 1458 patients), with 14 studies focusing on patients with resectable disease (group 1), and 19 studies focusing on patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced disease (group 2). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was administered in 97.4% of the studies, in which 76.9% was given radiotherapy and 74.4% administered with chemoradiation. The complete and partial response rate was 3.8% and 20.9%. The incidence of grade 3/4 toxicity was 11.3%. The overall resection rate after neoadjuvant therapy was 57.7% (group 1: 73.0%, group 2: 40.2%). The R0 resection rate was 84.2% (group 1: 88.2%, group 2: 79.4%). The overall survival for all patients was 16.79 months (resected 24.24, unresected 9.81; group 1: 17.76, group 2: 16.20). Our results demonstrate that neoadjuvant therapy has not been proven to be beneficial and should be considered with caution in patients with resectable PC. Patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced disease may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy, but further research is needed.

The Role of Radiation Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer in the Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Settings

Pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the United States. Although surgery remains the only curative treatment, chemotherapy and radiation therapy are frequently used. In the adjuvant setting, radiation is usually delivered with chemotherapy to eradicate residual microscopic or macroscopic disease in the resection bed. Neoadjuvant radiation therapy has become more frequently utilized. This article reviews the historical and modern literature regarding radiation therapy in the neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, focusing on the evolution of radiation therapy techniques and clinical trials in an attempt to identify patients best suited to receiving radiation therapy.

ACR Appropriateness Criteria® Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Management of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma continues to present a challenge due to a paucity of high-quality randomized studies. Administration of adjuvant chemotherapy is widely accepted due to the high risk of systemic spread associated with pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but the role of radiation therapy is less clear. This paper reviews literature associated with resectable pancreatic cancer to include prognostic factors to aid in the selection of patients appropriate for adjuvant therapies. The American College of Radiology Appropriateness Criteria are evidence-based guidelines for specific clinical conditions that are reviewed annually by a multidisciplinary expert panel. The guideline development and revision include an extensive analysis of current medical literature from peer reviewed journals and the application of well-established methodologies (RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation or GRADE) to rate the appropriateness of imaging and treatment procedures for specific clinical scenarios. In those instances where evidence is lacking or equivocal, expert opinion may supplement the available evidence to recommend imaging or treatment.

Clinical benefits of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head: an observational study using inverse probability of treatment weighting

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) and subset of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients who are most likely to benefit from this strategy remain elusive. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of NACRT in patients with resectable (R) or borderline resectable (BR) adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head. BR diseases were classified into two groups: lesions involving exclusively the portal vein system (BR-PV) and those abutting the major artery (BR-A).

METHODS

A total of 504 patients treated with curative intent for PDAC were analyzed (R, n = 273; BR-PV, n = 129; BR-A, n = 102). Patients who underwent upfront surgery and those who underwent NACRT followed by surgery were compared using propensity score-matched and inverse probability of treatment-weighted analyses (UMIN000019719).

RESULTS

No significant differences were noted in the incidences of curative resection among the three categories (R, BR-PV and BR-A). Propensity score-weighted logistic regression analysis revealed that the incidence of pathologically positive resection margins was reduced by NACRT only for BR patients. Among the propensity score-matched patients, NACRT rather than upfront surgery significantly prolonged the median survival time of BR-PV patients (28.4 vs. 20.1 months; P = 0.044) but not that of R-PDAC patients (28.6 vs. 33.7 months; P = 0.960). NACRT prolonged the median survival time of BR-A patients (18.1 vs. 10.0 months; P = 0.046), but the results remained unsatisfactory.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that NACRT improves R0 rates and increases the survival of patients with BR-PV adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head but not that of patients with R-PDAC.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for resected pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A nationwide propensity score matched analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is an emerging paradigm in pancreatic cancer care; however, its role for resectable disease remains controversial in the absence of conclusive randomized controlled trials. The purpose of the present study is to assess the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on survival in resected pancreatic cancer patients by clinical stage.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Data Base from 2004 to 2012 including nonmetastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients who underwent pancreatectomy and initiated chemotherapy. Propensity score matching within each stage was used to account for potential selection bias between patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery. Overall survival was compared by the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

In the study, 1,541 and 7,159 patients received neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery and upfront surgery succeeded by adjuvant therapy, respectively. In clinical stage III pancreatic cancer (n = 486), neoadjuvant therapy was associated with significant survival benefit after matching (median survival 22.9 vs 17.3 months; log-rank P < .0001) compared with conventional upfront surgery followed by adjuvant therapy; however, no survival difference was found between the 2 treatment sequences in patients with clinical stage I (n = 3,149; median survival, 26.2 vs 25.7 months; P = .4418) and II (n = 5,065; median survival, 23.5 vs 23.0 months; P = .7751) disease after matching.

CONCLUSION

The survival impact of neoadjuvant therapy is stage-dependent. Neoadjuvant therapy does not disadvantage survival compared with conventional upfront surgery followed by adjuvant therapy in any stage, and is associated with a significant survival advantage in stage III pancreatic cancer.

Regression grading in neoadjuvant treated pancreatic cancer: an interobserver study

AIM

Several regression grading systems have been proposed for neoadjuvant chemoradiation-treated pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). This study aimed to examine the utility, reproducibility and level of concordance of three most frequently used grading systems.

METHODS

Four gastrointestinal pathologists used the College of American Pathologists (CAP), Evans, MD Anderson Cancer Centre (MDA) regression grading systems to grade 14 selected cases (7-20 slides from each case) of neoadjuvant chemoradiation-treated PDAC. A postscoring discussion with each pathologist was conducted. The results were entered into a standardised data collection form and statistical analyses were performed.

RESULTS

There was little concordance across the three systems. The Kendall coefficient of concordance agreement scores were: CAP: 2-poor, 2-fair; Evans: 1-fair, 1-moderate, 2-good; MDA: 1-poor, 2-moderate, 1-good. Interpretation in all three grades in the CAP grading system was a source of discrepancy. Furthermore, using fibrosis as a criterion to assess regression was contentious. In the Evans system, quantifying tumour destruction using arbitrary percentage cut-offs (ie, 9% vs 10%; 50% vs 51%, etc) was imprecise and subjective. Although the MDA system generated greatest concordance, this was due to 'oversimplification' surrounding wide, arbitrarily assigned thresholds of </> 5% of tumour.

CONCLUSIONS

All systems lacked precision and clarity for accurate regression grading. Presently the clinical utility and impact of histological regression grading in patient management is questionable. There is a need to re-evaluate regression grading in the pancreas and establish a reproducible, clinically relevant grading system.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgical strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is gaining acceptance as a valid treatment option for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer; however, its value for clearly resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. The aim of this study was to use a Markov decision analysis model, in the absence of adequately powered randomized trials, to compare the life expectancy (LE) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) of neoadjuvant therapy to conventional upfront surgical strategies in resectable pancreatic cancer patients.

METHODS

A Markov decision model was created to compare two strategies: attempted pancreatic resection followed by adjuvant chemoradiotherapy and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by restaging with, if appropriate, attempted pancreatic resection. Data obtained through a comprehensive systematic search in PUBMED of the literature from 2000 to 2015 were used to estimate the probabilities used in the model. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 786 potentially eligible studies identified, 22 studies met the inclusion criteria and were used to extract the probabilities used in the model. Base case analyses of the model showed a higher LE (32.2 vs. 26.7 months) and QALE (25.5 vs. 20.8 quality-adjusted life months) for patients in the neoadjuvant therapy arm compared to upfront surgery. Probabilistic sensitivity analyses for LE and QALE revealed that neoadjuvant therapy is favorable in 59% and 60% of the cases respectively.

CONCLUSION(S)

Although conceptual, these data suggest that neoadjuvant therapy offers substantial benefit in LE and QALE for resectable pancreatic cancer patients. These findings highlight the value of further prospective randomized trials comparing neoadjuvant therapy to conventional upfront surgical strategies.

Perioperative chemotherapy is associated with a survival advantage in early stage adenocarcinoma of the pancreatic head

BACKGROUND

The value of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in the treatment of early stage pancreatic cancer is not yet clear.

METHODS

We evaluated patients from the National Cancer Data Base who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for clinical stage I and II pancreatic adenocarcinoma between 2006 and 2012.

RESULTS

In total, 7,881 patients were identified. Of these, 27.5% received no chemotherapy, 57.4% received adjuvant chemotherapy, 10.2% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone, and 4.9% received perioperative chemotherapy, both preoperative and postoperative chemotherapy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy use (neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and perioperative chemotherapy) increased from 12.0% in 2006 to 20.2% in 2012. Patients who received chemotherapy prior to the operation (neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone and perioperative chemotherapy) had greater rates of margin negative (80.2% vs 73.0%, P < .001) and node negative (58.2% vs 28.7%, P < .001) resections and shorter mean durations of stay (12.0 vs 11.1 days, P = .012) than those receiving either adjuvant chemotherapy or no chemotherapy at all. There were no differences in 30-day unplanned readmissions (P = .074) and 90-day mortality (P = .227). On Cox survival analysis, adjusted for clinical variables including age and comorbid disease, patients undergoing perioperative chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone demonstrated significantly improved overall survival relative to that of patients undergoing resection alone (all P < .001). Patients receiving perioperative chemotherapy demonstrated a significant overall survival advantage compared with those receiving adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.75; 95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.85). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone had a marginal overall survival benefit compared with adjuvant chemotherapy (hazard ratio 0.89; 95% confidence interval, 0.81-0.98).

CONCLUSION

Early stage pancreatic cancer patients who receive perioperative chemotherapy have better overall survival than those receiving no chemotherapy, adjuvant chemotherapy, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy alone. Patterns of postoperative morbidity are similar regardless of the sequence of therapy. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy should be considered for patients presenting with early stage pancreatic cancer.

Potentially Curable Pancreatic Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to oncologists and others on potentially curative therapy for patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

ASCO convened a panel of medical oncology, radiation oncology, surgical oncology, palliative care, and advocacy experts and conducted a systematic review of literature from January 2002 to June 2015. Outcomes included overall survival, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Nine randomized controlled trials met the systematic review criteria.

RECOMMENDATIONS

A multiphase computed tomography scan of the abdomen and pelvis or magnetic resonance imaging should be performed for all patients to assess the anatomic relationships of the primary tumor and for the presence of intra-abdominal metastases. Baseline performance status, comorbidity profile, and goals of care should be evaluated and established. Primary surgical resection is recommended for all patients who have no metastases, appropriate performance and comorbidity profiles, and no radiographic interface between primary tumor and mesenteric vasculature. Preoperative therapy is recommended for patients who meet specific characteristics. All patients with resected pancreatic cancer who did not receive preoperative therapy should be offered 6 months of adjuvant chemotherapy in the absence of contraindications. Adjuvant chemoradiation may be offered to patients who did not receive preoperative therapy with microscopically positive margins (R1) after resection and/or who had node-positive disease after completion of 4 to 6 months of systemic adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients should have a full assessment of symptoms, psychological status, and social supports and should receive palliative care early. Patients who have completed treatment and have no evidence of disease should be monitored. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/guidelines/PCPC and www.asco.org/guidelineswiki.

Preoperative radiochemotherapy versus immediate surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC trial): study protocol for a multicentre randomized controlled trial

Background

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth largest cause of cancer death in the United States and Europe with over 100,000 deaths per year in Europe alone. The overall 5-year survival ranges from 2–7 % and has hardly improved over the last two decades. Approximately 15 % of all patients have resectable disease at diagnosis, and of those, only a subgroup has a resectable tumour at surgical exploration. Data from cohort studies have suggested that outcome can be improved by preoperative radiochemotherapy, but data from well-designed randomized studies are lacking. Our PREOPANC phase III trial aims to test the hypothesis that median overall survival of patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer can be improved with preoperative radiochemotherapy.

Methods/design

The PREOPANC trial is a randomized, controlled, multicentric superiority trial, initiated by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group. Patients with (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer are randomized to A: direct explorative laparotomy or B: after negative diagnostic laparoscopy, preoperative radiochemotherapy, followed by explorative laparotomy. A hypofractionated radiation scheme of 15 fractions of 2.4 gray (Gy) is combined with a course of gemcitabine, 1,000 mg/m²/dose on days 1, 8 and 15, preceded and followed by a modified course of gemcitabine. The target volumes of radiation are delineated on a 4D CT scan, where at least 95 % of the prescribed dose of 36 Gy in 15 fractions should cover 98 % of the planning target volume. Standard adjuvant chemotherapy is administered in both treatment arms after resection (six cycles in arm A and four in arm B). In total, 244 patients will be randomized in 17 hospitals in the Netherlands. The primary endpoint is overall survival by intention to treat. Secondary endpoints are (R0) resection rate, disease-free survival, time to locoregional recurrence or distant metastases and perioperative complications. Secondary endpoints for the experimental arm are toxicity and radiologic and pathologic response.

Discussion

The PREOPANC trial is designed to investigate whether preoperative radiochemotherapy improves overall survival by means of increased (R0) resection rates in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Trial registration

Trial open for accrual: 3 April 2013

The Netherlands National Trial Register – NTR3709 (8 November 2012)

EU Clinical Trials Register – 2012-003181-40 (11 December 2012)

Clinical features and treatment outcome of borderline resectable pancreatic head/body cancer: a multi-institutional survey by the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery

BACKGROUND

Optimal treatment types and prognosis for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) remain unclear because of the lack of studies involving large series of patients.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed various prognostic factors for 624 BRPC (pancreatic head/body) patients treated from June 2002 to May 2007, by distributing questionnaires to member institutions of the Japanese Society of Pancreatic Surgery in 2010. BRPC was defined according to the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) Clinical Practice Guidelines (2009).

RESULTS

Among 624 patients, 539 (86.4 %) underwent curative-intent resection, showing an R0 resection rate of 65.9 %. The 3- and 5-year survival rates were 16.1 and 9.9 % in all patients, 22.8 and 12.5 % in the resected patients, and 4.4 and 0 % (P < 0.0001) in the unresected patients, respectively. The following factors influencing survival in all patients were selected as independent prognostic factors using multivariate analysis: major arterial involvement on imaging study; preoperative treatment; surgical resection; and postoperative chemotherapy. Among the resected cases, multivariate analysis revealed that major arterial involvement and remnant tumor status were independent prognostic factors.

CONCLUSION

BRPC included two distinct categories of tumors influencing survival: those with portal vein/superior mesenteric vein invasion alone and those with major arterial invasion, which was the most exacerbating factor in the analysis.

Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreas adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy. The risk of recurrence remains high even for patients with localized disease undergoing surgical resection. Adjuvant systemic therapy has demonstrated the ability to reduce the risk of recurrence and prolong survival. Determination of optimal adjuvant treatment, systemic therapy, and/or combinations to further improve recurrence rates and overall survival are still needed. Neoadjuvant therapy represents an alternative emerging paradigm of investigation with several theoretic advantages over adjuvant therapy. This article summarizes the major adjuvant and neoadjuvant studies for pancreas adenocarcinoma and highlights key areas of ongoing investigation.