Pretreatment assessment of resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: expert consensus statement

HIFU induces reprogramming of the tumor immune microenvironment in a pancreatic cancer mouse model

This study evaluates the effects of different high-intensity focused ultrasound irradiation (HIFU) methods on local tumor suppression and systemic antitumor effects, including the abscopal effect, in a mouse model of pancreatic cancer. To ascertain the efficacy of the treatment, pancreatic cancer cells were injected into the thighs of mice and HIFU was applied on one side using continuous waves or trigger pulse waves. Then, tumor volume, tissue changes, and immune marker levels were analyzed. Both the irradiation methods suppressed tumor growth, with the trigger pulse wave showing stronger effects and the difference being significant. Tumor suppression was also observed on the non-irradiated side, suggesting an abscopal effect. These effects vary depending on the irradiation method used. We conclude that HIFU induces both local tumor suppression and a systemic immune response, suggesting its potential for combination with immunotherapy for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

Dose-Escalated SBRT for Borderline and Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: Resectability Rate and Pathological Results of a Multicenter Prospective Study

OBJECTIVE

We demonstrated for the first time the safety and feasibility of escalating up to 55 Gy/11 Gy/fr/5fr in borderline (BRPC)/unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), using the standard LINAC platform. The aim of the present study is to assess for the first time the impact of this high-dose neoadjuvant stereotactic ablative radiotherapy (SABRT) protocol on tumor resectability and pathological responses.

MATERIALS/METHODS

From June 2017 to December 2022, patients with BRPC/LAPC were treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (ChT) and SABRT-escalated doses of SIB at 45 Gy, 50 Gy, and up to 55 Gy (BED ≥ 100). Radiological evaluation was conducted with a CT scan 6-8 weeks post-treatment to determine resectability status based on established criteria (SAR/APA2014). Surgical decisions were made by the multidisciplinary tumor board of the participating institutions. Pathological assessments post-surgery used criteria from the College of American Pathologists (CAP), categorizing resection status as R0 (negative margins), R1 (microscopic tumor margins), and R2 (macroscopic tumor margins). Tumor response was evaluated with the Tumor Response Scoring (TRS) system, as G0 (no viable cancer cells), G1 (single cells or rare small groups), G2 (residual cancer with evident regression), and G3 (extensive residual cancer).

RESULTS

Thirty-three patients (p) were included: 39.4% (13p) BRPC/60.6% (20p) LAPC. After ChT-SABRT, 45.5% (15p) were considered resectable, with 11/13 (84.6%) BRPC and 4/20 (20%) LAPC (p < 0.0001). One patient refused surgery and other patient died of COVID sepsis. Two more patients had disseminated disease at surgery. Among the 11 patients who underwent full surgery, all patients achieved either clean margins R0: 72.7% (8p) or microscopic affected margins R1: 27.3% (3p). TRS scores were G1: 27.3% (3p), G2: 54.5% (6p), and G3: 18.2% (2p). The present follow-up (FUP) was closed on 1 November 2024 (23.55 months, range: 6-71 months). The mean freedom from local progression as the first cause of disease failure was 43.30 ± 3.09 (37.23-49.38), and the median was not reached. The actuarial 1- and 2-year rates for freedom from local relapse as a first cause of disease failure were 92.3% (87.7-93.3%) and 79.7% (79.7-87.7%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant ChT-SABRT in LAPC improves resectability rates and induces relevant tumor regression. These promising findings should be validated by larger sample sizes and extended follow-up.

Development and Validation of a Survival Prediction Model for Patients With Pancreatic Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) face challenging treatment decisions following their diagnosis. We developed and validated a survival prognostication model using routinely available clinical information, patient-reported symptoms, performance status, and initial cancer-directed treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients with PDAC from 2007 to 2020 using linked administrative databases in Ontario, Canada. Patients were randomly selected for model development (75%) and validation (25%). Using the development cohort, a multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression with backward stepwise variable selection was used to predict the probability of survival. Model performance was assessed on the validation cohort using the concordance index and calibration plots.

RESULTS

There were 17,450 patients (49% female) with a median age of 72 years (interquartile range 63-81) and a mean survival time of 9 months. In the derivation cohort, 1,469 patients (11%) had early stage, 4,202 (32%) had advanced stage disease, and 7,417 (57%) had unknown stage. The following factors were associated with an increased risk of death by more than 10%: tumor in the tail of the pancreas; advanced stage; hospitalization 3 months before diagnosis; congestive heart failure or dementia; low, moderate, or high pain score; moderate or high appetite score; high dyspnea and tiredness score; and a performance status score of 60-70 or lower. The calibration plot indicated good agreement with a C-index of 0.76.

DISCUSSION

This model accurately predicted one-year survival for PDAC using clinical factors, symptoms, and performance status. This model may foster shared decision making for patients and their providers.

An update on pancreatic cancer imaging, staging, and use of the PACT-UK radiology template pre- and post-neoadjuvant treatment

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma continues to have a poor prognosis, although recent advances in neoadjuvant treatments (NATs) have provided some hope. Imaging assessment of suspected tumours can be challenging and requires a specific approach, with pancreas protocol CT being the primary imaging modality for staging with other modalities used as problem-solving tools to facilitate appropriate management. Imaging assessment post NAT can be particularly difficult due to a current lack of robust radiological criteria to predict response and differentiate treatment induced fibrosis/inflammation from residual tumour. This review aims to provide an update of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with particular focus on three points: tumour staging pre- and post-NAT including vascular assessment, structured reporting with introduction of the PAncreatic Cancer reporting Template-UK (PACT-UK) radiology template, and the potential future role of artificial intelligence in the diagnosis and staging of pancreatic cancer.

Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a lethal disease with few effective treatment options. Many anti-cancer therapies have been tested in the locally advanced and metastatic setting, with mixed results. This review synthesises all the randomised data available to help better inform patient and clinician decision-making. It updates the previous version of the review, published in 2018.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both on overall survival, severe or life-threatening adverse events, and quality of life in people undergoing first-line treatment of advanced pancreatic cancer.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for published and unpublished studies in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and CANCERLIT, and handsearched various sources for additional studies. The latest search dates were in March and July 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials comparing chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or both with another intervention or best supportive care. Participants were required to have locally advanced, unresectable pancreatic cancer or metastatic pancreatic cancer not amenable to curative intent treatment. Histological confirmation was required. Trials were required to report overall survival.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 75 studies in the review and 51 in the meta-analysis (11,333 participants). We divided the studies into seven categories: any anti-cancer treatment versus best supportive care; various chemotherapy types versus gemcitabine; gemcitabine-based combinations versus gemcitabine alone; various chemotherapy combinations versus gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel; fluoropyrimidine-based studies; miscellaneous studies; and radiotherapy studies. In general, the included studies were at low risk for random sequence generation, detection bias, attrition bias, and reporting bias, at unclear risk for allocation concealment, and high risk for performance bias. Compared to best supportive care, chemotherapy likely results in little to no difference in overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.33; absolute risk of death at 12 months of 971 per 1000 versus 962 per 1000; 4 studies, 298 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The adverse effects of chemotherapy and impacts on quality of life (QoL) were uncertain. Many of the chemotherapy regimens were outdated. Eight studies compared non-gemcitabine-based chemotherapy regimens to gemcitabine. These showed that 5-fluorouracil (5FU) likely reduces OS (HR 1.69, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.27; risk of death at 12 months of 914 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 1 study, 126 participants; moderate certainty), and grade 3/4 adverse events (QoL not reported). Fixed dose rate gemcitabine likely improves OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66 to 0.94; risk of death at 12 months of 683 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 2 studies, 644 participants; moderate certainty), and likely increase grade 3/4 adverse events (QoL not reported). FOLFIRINOX improves OS (HR 0.51, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.60; risk of death at 12 months of 524 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; P < 0.001; 2 studies, 652 participants; high certainty), and delays deterioration in QoL, but increases grade 3/4 adverse events. Twenty-eight studies compared gemcitabine-based combinations to gemcitabine. Gemcitabine plus platinum may result in little to no difference in OS (HR 0.94, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.08; risk of death at 12 months of 745 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 6 studies, 1140 participants; low certainty), may increase grade 3/4 adverse events, and likely worsens QoL. Gemcitabine plus fluoropyrimidine improves OS (HR 0.88, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.95; risk of death at 12 months of 722 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 10 studies, 2718 participants; high certainty), likely increases grade 3/4 adverse events, and likely improves QoL. Gemcitabine plus topoisomerase inhibitors result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.16; risk of death at 12 months of 770 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 3 studies, 839 participants; high certainty), likely increases grade 3/4 adverse events, and likely does not alter QoL. Gemcitabine plus taxane result in a large improvement in OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.81; risk of death at 12 months of 644 per 1000 versus 767 per 1000; 2 studies, 986 participants; high certainty), and likely increases grade 3/4 adverse events and improves QoL. Nine studies compared chemotherapy combinations to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. Fluoropyrimidine-based combination regimens improve OS (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.89; risk of death at 12 months of 542 per 1000 versus 628 per 1000; 6 studies, 1285 participants; high certainty). The treatment arms had distinct toxicity profiles, and there was little to no difference in QoL. Alternative schedules of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel likely result in little to no difference in OS (HR 1.10, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.47; risk of death at 12 months of 663 per 1000 versus 628 per 1000; 2 studies, 367 participants; moderate certainty) or QoL, but may increase grade 3/4 adverse events. Four studies compared fluoropyrimidine-based combinations to fluoropyrimidines alone, with poor quality evidence. Fluoropyrimidine-based combinations are likely to result in little to no impact on OS (HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.15; risk of death at 12 months of 765 per 1000 versus 704 per 1000; P = 0.27; 4 studies, 491 participants; moderate certainty) versus fluoropyrimidines alone. The evidence suggests that there was little to no difference in grade 3/4 adverse events or QoL between the two groups. We included only one radiotherapy (iodine-125 brachytherapy) study with 165 participants. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of radiotherapy on outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Combination chemotherapy remains standard of care for metastatic pancreatic cancer. Both FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine plus a taxane improve OS compared to gemcitabine alone. Furthermore, the evidence suggests that fluoropyrimidine-based combination chemotherapy regimens improve OS compared to gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel. The effects of radiotherapy were uncertain as only one low-quality trial was included. Selection of the most appropriate chemotherapy for individuals still remains unpersonalised, with clinicopathological stratification remaining elusive. Biomarker development is essential to assist in rationalising treatment selection for patients.

Prognostic implication of extra-pancreatic organ invasion in resectable pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreas tail

OBJECTIVES

To assess the prognostic significance of extra-pancreatic organ invasion in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in the pancreas tail.

MATERIALS & METHODS

This retrospective study included patients with resectable PDAC in the pancreas tail who received upfront surgery between 2014 and 2020 at a tertiary institution. Preoperative pancreas protocol computed tomography (CT) scans evaluated tumor size, peripancreatic tumor infiltration, suspicious metastatic lymph nodes, and extra-pancreatic organ invasion. The influence of extra-pancreatic organ invasion, detected by CT or postoperative pathology, on pathologic resection margin status was evaluated using logistic regression. The impact on recurrence-free survival (RFS) was analyzed using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models (clinical-CT and clinical-pathologic).

RESULTS

The study included 158 patients (mean age, 65 years ± 8.8 standard deviation; 93 men). Extra-pancreatic organ invasion identified by either CT (p = 0.92) or pathology (p = 0.99) was not associated with a positive resection margin. Neither CT (p = 0.42) nor pathological (p = 0.64) extra-pancreatic organ invasion independently correlated with RFS. Independent predictors for RFS included suspicious metastatic lymph node (hazard ratio [HR], 2.05; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.08-3.9; p = 0.03) on CT in the clinical-CT model, pathological T stage (HR, 2.97; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 1.39-6.35; p = 0.005 for T2 and HR, 3.78; 95 % CI, 1.64-8.76; p = 0.002 for T3) and adjuvant therapy (HR, 0.62; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 0.42-0.92; p = 0.02) in the clinical-pathologic model.

CONCLUSION

Extra-pancreatic organ invasion does not independently influence pathologic resection margin status and RFS in patients with resectable PDAC in the pancreas tail after curative-intent resection; therefore, it should not be considered a high-risk factor.

The Evolving Role of Neoadjuvant Radiation Therapy in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the deadliest cancers. Surgical resection is the most reliable chance for cure, but high rates of positive margins and local failure persist. Neoadjuvant therapies (NAT), including chemotherapy and radiation therapy (RT), are being explored to improve surgical outcomes, particularly in borderline resectable (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC). This review aims to summarize the current landscape and future directions for neoadjuvant RT (NART) in PDAC.

METHODS

The review includes a detailed analysis of past and ongoing clinical trials investigating various NART approaches in PDAC, with an emphasis on different RT techniques, fractionation schemes, and their integration into multimodal treatment strategies.

RESULTS

Early evidence suggests that NART can improve resection margins and local control. However, recent trials, including the Alliance A021501 and LAP-07 trials, have failed to demonstrate significant survival benefits with the addition of RT to NAT. Nevertheless, nuances in trial design and execution continue to keep the question of NART open. Newer approaches, such as stereotactic magnetic resonance-guided adaptive radiation therapy (SMART), show promise in improving local control and survival, but further phase 3 trials are needed.

CONCLUSIONS

While NART has shown potential in improving local control in PDAC, its impact on overall survival remains unclear. Ongoing trials, particularly those utilizing advanced techniques like SMART, are critical in defining the role of RT in the neoadjuvant setting for PDAC. Collaboration across multidisciplinary teams is essential to optimize treatment strategies and trial outcomes.

The Oncological Stress Test of Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Systematic Review in Outcomes of Neoadjuvant Therapy Compared to Upfront Resection Approach for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma, increasingly diagnosed in the United States, has a disheartening initial resection rate of 15%. Neoadjuvant therapy, particularly FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-based regimens, is gaining favor for its potential to improve resectability rates and achieving microscopically negative margins (R0) in borderline resectable cases, marked by intricate arterial or venous involvement. Despite surgery being the sole curative approach, actual benefit of neoadjuvant therapy remains debatable. This study scrutinizes current literature on oncological outcomes post-resection of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. A MEDLINE/PubMed search was conducted to systematically compare oncological outcomes of patients treated with either neoadjuvant therapy with intent of curative resection or an "upfront resection" approach. A total of 1293 studies were initially screened and 30 were included (n = 1714) in this analysis. All studies included data on outcomes of patients with borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma being treated with neoadjuvant therapy (n = 1387) or a resection-first approach (n = 356). Patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy underwent resection 52% of the time, achieving negative margins of 43% (n = 601). Approximately 77% of patients who received an upfront resection underwent a successful resection, with 39% achieving negative margins. Neoadjuvant therapy remains marginally efficacious in treatment of borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma, as patients undergo an operation and successful resection less often when treated with neoadjuvant therapy. Rates of curative resection are comparable, despite neoadjuvant therapy being a primary recommendation in borderline resectable cases and employed more often than upfront resection. Upfront resection may offer improved resection rates by intention-to-treat, which can provide more patients with paths to curative resection.

Clinical Outcomes of Surgery after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

Clinical outcomes of surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy have not been investigated for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), despite well-established outcomes in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). This study aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes of patients with LAPC who underwent curative resection following neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the records of patients diagnosed with pancreatic adenocarcinoma between January 2017 and December 2020.

RESULTS

Among 1,358 patients, 260 underwent surgery following neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Among 356 LAPC patients, 98 (27.5%) and 147 (35.1%) of 418 BRPC patients underwent surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Compared to resectable pancreatic cancer (resectable PC) with upfront surgery, both LAPC and BRPC exhibited higher rates of venous resection (28.6% vs. 49.0% vs. 4.0%), arterial resection (30.6% vs. 6.8% vs. 0.5%) and greater estimated blood loss (260.5 vs. 213.1 vs. 70.4 mL). However, hospital stay, readmission rates, and postoperative pancreatic fistula rates (grade B or C) did not differ significantly between LAPC, BRPC, and resectable PC. Overall and relapse-free survival did not differ significantly between LAPC and BRPC patients. The median overall survival was 37.3 months for LAPC and 37.0 months for BRPC. The median relapse-free survival was 22.7 months for LAPC and 26.0 months for BRPC.

CONCLUSION

Overall survival time and postoperative complications in LAPC patients who underwent curative resection following neoadjuvant chemotherapy showed similar results to those of BRPC patients. Further research is needed to identify specific sub-populations of LAPC patients who benefit most from conversion surgery and to minimize postoperative complications.

Surgery for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Preoperative Planning, Technical Considerations, and Building a Program

Pancreaticoduodenectomy, first described in 1935, has subsequently been refined over decades into the operation performed today for tumors of the pancreatic head and periampullary region. For years following Whipple's first publication, tumors found to be inseparable from the surrounding vasculature were considered locoregionally advanced and unresectable. Fortner began performing regional pancreatectomy with routine enbloc resection of the portal vein/superior mesenteric vein in an attempt to address high local recurrence rates and high rates of aborted operations due to vascular involvement.

Use of Diagnostic Laparoscopy and Peritoneal Washings for Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy that often presents with advanced disease. Accurate staging is essential for treatment planning and shared decision-making with patients. Staging laparoscopy is a minimally invasive procedure that can detect radiographically occult metastatic disease. Its routine use with the collection of peritoneal washings in patients with pancreatic cancer remains controversial. We, herein, review the current literature concerning staging laparoscopy and peritoneal washings in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Inter-reader agreement of pancreatic adenocarcinoma resectability assessment with photon counting versus energy integrating detector CT

PURPOSE

To compare the inter-reader agreement of pancreatic adenocarcinoma resectability assessment at pancreatic protocol photon-counting CT (PCCT) with conventional energy-integrating detector CT (EID-CT).

METHODS

A retrospective single institution database search identified all contrast-enhanced pancreatic mass protocol abdominal CT performed at an outpatient facility with both a PCCT and EID-CT from 4/11/2022 to 10/30/2022. Patients without pancreatic adenocarcinoma were excluded. Four fellowship-trained abdominal radiologists, blinded to CT type, independently assessed vascular tumor involvement (uninvolved, abuts ≤ 180°, encases > 180°; celiac, superior mesenteric artery (SMA), common hepatic artery (CHA), superior mesenteric vein (SMV), main portal vein), the presence/absence of metastases, overall tumor resectability (resectable, borderline resectable, locally advanced, metastatic), and diagnostic confidence. Fleiss's kappa was used to calculate inter-reader agreement. CTDIvol was recorded. Radiation dose metrics were compared with a two-sample t-test. A p < .05 indicated statistical significance.

RESULTS

145 patients (71 men, mean[SD] age: 66[9] years) were included. There was substantial inter-reader agreement, for celiac artery, SMA, and SMV involvement at PCCT (kappa = 0.61-0.69) versus moderate agreement at EID-CT (kappa = 0.56-0.59). CHA had substantial inter-reader agreement at both PCCT (kappa = 0.67) and EIDCT (kappa = 0.70). For metastasis identification, radiologists had substantial inter-reader agreement at PCCT (kappa = 0.78) versus moderate agreement at EID-CT (kappa = 0.56). CTDIvol for PCCT and EID-CT were 16.9[7.4]mGy and 29.8[26.6]mGy, respectively (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

There was substantial inter-reader agreement for involvement of 4/5 major peripancreatic vessels (celiac artery, SMA, CHA, and SMV) at PCCT compared with 2/5 for EID-CT. PCCT also afforded substantial inter-reader agreement for metastasis detection versus moderate agreement at EID-CT with statistically significant radiation dose reduction.

Management of distal cholangiocarcinoma with arterial involvement: Systematic review and case series on the role of neoadjuvant therapy

BACKGROUND

The use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in distal cholangiocarcinoma (dCCA) with regional arterial or extensive venous involvement, is not widely accepted and evidence is sparse.

AIM

To synthesise evidence on NAT for dCCA and present the experience of a high-volume tertiary-centre managing dCCA with arterial involvement.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed according to PRISMA guidance to identify all studies reporting outcomes of patients with dCCA who received NAT. All patients from 2017 to 2022 who were referred for NAT for dCCA at our centre were retrospectively collected from a prospectively maintained database. Baseline characteristics, NAT type, progression to surgery and oncological outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included. The definition of "unresectable" locally advanced dCCA was heterogenous. Four studies reported outcomes for 9 patients who received NAT for dCCA with extensive vascular involvement. R0 resection rate ranged between 0 and 100% but without survival benefit in most cases. Remaining studies considered either NAT in resectable dCCA or inclusive with extrahepatic CCA. The presented case series includes 9 patients (median age 67, IQR 56-74 years, male:female 5:4) referred for NAT for borderline resectable or locally advanced disease. Three patients progressed to surgery and 2 were resected. One patient died at 14 months with evidence of recurrence at 6 months and the other died at 51 months following recurrence 6 months post-operatively.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for benefit of NAT is limited. Consensus on criteria for uniform definition of resectability for dCCA is required. We propose using the established National-Comprehensive-Cancer-Network® criteria for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

A Visual Aid Tool for Detection of Pancreatic Tumour-Vessel Contact on Staging CT: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Purpose: In pancreatic adenocarcinoma, the difficult distinction between normal and affected pancreas on CT studies may lead to discordance between the pre-surgical assessment of vessel involvement and intraoperative findings. We hypothesize that a visual aid tool could improve the performance of radiology residents when detecting vascular invasion in pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients. Methods: This study consisted of 94 pancreatic adenocarcinoma patient CTs. The visual aid compared the estimated body fat density of each patient with the densities surrounding the superior mesenteric artery and mapped them onto the CT scan. Four radiology residents annotated the locations of perceived vascular invasion on each scan with the visual aid overlaid on alternating scans. Using 3 expert radiologists as the reference standard, we quantified the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to determine the performance of the tool. We then used sensitivity, specificity, balanced accuracy ((sensitivity + specificity)/2), and spatial metrics to determine the performance of the residents with and without the tool. Results: The mean area under the curve was 0.80. Radiology residents' sensitivity/specificity/balanced accuracy for predicting vascular invasion were 50%/85%/68% without the tool and 81%/79%/80% with it compared to expert radiologists, and 58%/85%/72% without the tool and 78%/77%/77% with it compared to the surgical pathology. The tool was not found to impact the spatial metrics calculated on the resident annotations of vascular invasion. Conclusion: The improvements provided by the visual aid were predominantly reflected by increased sensitivity and accuracy, indicating the potential of this tool as a learning aid for trainees.

Do pre-operative endoscopic procedures, impact the surgical outcomes of robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy?

The role and risks of pre-operative endoscopic procedures, such as endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) and endoscopic ultrasound with fine needle aspiration (EUS/FNA), in patients undergoing robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy are not well-defined despite a broad consensus on the utility of these interventions for diagnostic and therapeutic purposes prior to major pancreatic operations. This study investigates the impact of such preoperative endoscopic interventions on perioperative outcomes in robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy. With Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval we retrospectively analyzed 772 patients who underwent robotic pancreatectomies between 2012 and 2023. Specifically, 430 of these patients underwent a robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy were prospectively evaluated: 93 (22%) patients underwent ERCP with EUS and FNA, 45 (10%) ERCP only, and 31 (7%) EUS and FNA, while 261 (61%) did not. Statistical analyses were performed using chi-square tests and Student's t-tests to compare perioperative outcomes between the two cohorts. Statistically significant differences were observed in patients who underwent a pre-operative endoscopic intervention and were more likely to have converted to an open operation (p = 0.04). The average number of harvested lymph nodes for patients who underwent preoperative endoscopic intervention was statistically significant compared to those who did not (p = 0.0001). All other perioperative variables were consistent across all cohorts. Patients who underwent endoscopic intervention before robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy were more likely to have an unplanned open operation. This study demonstrates the increased operative difficulties introduced by preoperative endoscopic interventions. Although there was no impact on overall patient outcomes, surgeons' experience can minimize the associated risks.

New Frontiers in Pancreatic Cancer Management: Current Treatment Options and the Emerging Role of Neoadjuvant Therapy

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) ranks among the 15 most prevalent cancers globally, characterized by aggressive growth and late-stage diagnosis. Advances in imaging and surgical techniques have redefined the classification of pancreatic PDAC into resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. While surgery remains the most effective treatment, only 20% of patients are eligible at diagnosis, necessitating innovative strategies to improve outcomes. Therefore, traditional treatment paradigms, primarily surgical resection for eligible patients, are increasingly supplemented by neoadjuvant therapies (NAT), which include chemotherapy, radiotherapy, or a combination of both. By administering systemic therapy prior to surgery, NAT aims to reduce tumor size and increase the feasibility of complete surgical resection, thus enhancing overall survival rates and potentially allowing more patients to undergo curative surgeries. Recent advances in treatment protocols, such as FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel, now integral to NAT strategies, have shown promising results in increasing the proportion of patients eligible for surgery by effectively reducing tumor size and addressing micrometastatic disease. Additionally, they offer improved response rates and survival benefits compared to traditional regimes. Despite these advancements, the role of NAT continues to evolve, necessitating ongoing research to optimize treatment regimens, minimize adverse effects, and identify patient populations that would benefit most from these approaches. Through a detailed analysis of current literature and recent clinical trials, this review highlights the transformative potential of NAT in managing PDAC, especially in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced stages, promising a shift towards more personalized and effective management strategies for PDAC.

Use of Vascular Shunt at the Time of Pancreatectomy with Venous Resection: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The rising diffusion of vascular resections during complex pancreatectomy for malignancy, for both oncological and technical matters, brought with it the use of vascular shunts, either temporary or definitive, to prevent bowel congestion and liver ischemia. This study aimed to systematically review the literature on the technical feasibility of vascular shunts during advanced pancreatic surgery, analyzing intraoperative and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library Central, according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies published before 2006 were excluded, considering the lack of a standardized definition of locally advanced pancreatic cancer. The main outcomes evaluated were the overall complication rate and shunt patency.

RESULTS

Among 789 papers retrieved from the database search, only five fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in the review, amounting to a total of 145 patients undergoing a shunt creation at the time of pancreatectomy. Pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) was found to be the most common diagnosis and pancreaticoduodenectomy was the main surgical procedure, accounting for 88% and 83% of the overall cohort, respectively. The distal splenorenal shunt was the most performed. Overall, 44 out of 145 patients (30%) experienced postoperative complications; the long-term patency of definitive shunts was 83% (110 out of 120 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

An increasing number of patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced PDAC are becoming amenable to resection and shunt creation may facilitate vascular resection with clear margins, becoming a valid tool of modern pancreatic surgery.

Radiochemotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer

Despite the advancements made in oncology in recent years, the treatment of pancreatic cancer remains a challenge. Five-year survival rates for this cancer do not exceed 10%. Among the reasons contributing to poor treatment outcomes are the oligosymptomatic course of the tumor, diagnostic difficulties due to the anatomical location of the organ, and the unique biological features of pancreatic cancer. The mainstay of treatment for resectable cancer is surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. For unresectable and metastatic cancers, chemotherapy remains the primary method of treatment. At the same time, for about thirty years, there have been attempts to improve treatment outcomes by using radiotherapy combined with systemic treatment. Unlike chemotherapy, radiotherapy has no established place in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. This paper addresses the topic of radiotherapy in pancreatic cancer as a valuable method that can improve treatment outcomes alongside chemotherapy.

Advances in Surgery and (Neo) Adjuvant Therapy in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer

A multimodality approach, which usually includes chemotherapy, surgery, and/or radiotherapy, is optimal for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. The timing and sequence of these interventions depend on anatomic resectability and the biological suitability of the tumor and the patient. Tumors with vascular involvement (ie, borderline resectable/locally advanced) require surgical reassessments after therapy and participation of surgeons familiar with advanced techniques. When indicated, venous reconstruction should be offered as standard of care because it has acceptable morbidity. Morbidity and mortality of pancreas surgery may be mitigated when surgery is performed at high-volume centers.

Neoadjuvant Therapy in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

In this perspective, we present our assessment of all of the known accumulated evidence on the role of neoadjuvant therapy in the management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer highlighting the gaps in the data, the current regimens used and providing a brief insight into the way forward.

Executive Summary of the American Radium Society Appropriate Use Criteria for Neoadjuvant Therapy for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Systematic Review and Guidelines

For patients with locoregionally confined pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), margin-negative surgical resection is the only known curative treatment; however, the majority of patients are not operable candidates at initial diagnosis. Among patients with resectable disease who undergo surgery alone, the 5-year survival remains poor. Adjuvant therapies, including systemic therapy or chemoradiation, are utilized as they improve locoregional control and overall survival. There has been increasing interest in the use of neoadjuvant therapy to obtain early control of occult metastatic disease, allow local tumor response to facilitate margin-negative resection, and provide a test of time and biology to assist with the selection of candidates most likely to benefit from radical surgical resection. However, limited guidance exists regarding the relative effectiveness of treatment options. In this systematic review, the American Radium Society multidisciplinary gastrointestinal expert panel convened to develop Appropriate Use Criteria evaluating the evidence regarding neoadjuvant treatment for patients with PDAC, including surgery, systemic therapy, and radiotherapy, in terms of oncologic outcomes and quality of life. The evidence was assessed using the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design framework and "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses" 2020 methodology. Eligible studies included phases 2 to 3 trials, meta-analyses, and retrospective analyses published between January 1, 2012 and December 30, 2022 in the Ovid Medline database. A summary of recommendations based on the available literature is outlined to guide practitioners in the management of patients with PDAC.

A meta-analysis on the efficacy of endoscopic ultrasonography for treatment of pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of Endoscopic Ultrasonography (EUS) for the treatment of pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Google Scholar databases were searched from the inception of the databases to June 2022. RevMan 5.3.0 software was utilized for data analysis. In total, 13 self-descriptive studies, which enrolled 382 patients, were finally included.

RESULTS

It was revealed that EUS for the treatment of pancreatic cancer exhibited a lower incidence of adverse reactions (Relative Risk Ration [RR = 0.23], 95 % Confidence interval [95 % CI 0.23-0.23]), a higher success rate (RR = 0.90, 95 % CI 0.90-0.90), and a low failure rate (RR = 0.06, 95 % CI 0.06-0.06). Moreover, EUS-guided Celiac Plexus Neurolysis (EUS-CPN) not only significantly relieved pancreatic cancer patients' pain (RR = 0.83, 95 % CI 0.83-0.83), but also significantly eliminated pain in some patients (RR = 0.09, 95 % CI 0.09-0.09). The effects of EUS on pancreatic cancer treatment were satisfactory, and few adverse reactions were found.

CONCLUSION

Owing to the restricted sample size in this meta-analysis, primarily consisting of descriptive studies, it was imperative to conduct more rigorously designed, multi-center, long-term follow-up, larger sample, and Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) to validate the findings.

Stereotactic body radiotherapy for pancreatic cancer - A systematic review of prospective data

Purpose

This systematic review aims to comprehensively summarize the current prospective evidence regarding Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy (SBRT) in various clinical contexts for pancreatic cancer including its use as neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC), induction therapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), salvage therapy for isolated local recurrence (ILR), adjuvant therapy after radical resection, and as a palliative treatment. Special attention is given to the application of magnetic resonance-guided radiotherapy (MRgRT).

Methods

Following PRISMA guidelines, a systematic review of the Medline database via PubMed was conducted focusing on prospective studies published within the past decade. Data were extracted concerning study characteristics, outcome measures, toxicity profiles, SBRT dosage and fractionation regimens, as well as additional systemic therapies.

Results and conclusion

31 studies with in total 1,571 patients were included in this review encompassing 14 studies for LAPC, 9 for neoadjuvant treatment, 2 for adjuvant treatment, 2 for ILR, with an additional 4 studies evaluating MRgRT. In LAPC, SBRT demonstrates encouraging results, characterized by favorable local control rates. Several studies even report conversion to resectable disease with substantial resection rates reaching 39%. The adoption of MRgRT may provide a solution to the challenge to deliver ablative doses while minimizing severe toxicities. In BRPC, select prospective studies combining preoperative ablative-dose SBRT with modern induction systemic therapies have achieved remarkable resection rates of up to 80%. MRgRT also holds potential in this context. Adjuvant SBRT does not appear to confer relevant advantages over chemotherapy. While prospective data for SBRT in ILR and for palliative pain relief are limited, they corroborate positive findings from retrospective studies.

Clinical Evaluation of the Pancreatic Cancer Microenvironment: Opportunities and Challenges

Advances in our understanding of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and its tumor microenvironment (TME) have the potential to transform treatment for the hundreds of thousands of patients who are diagnosed each year. Whereas the clinical assessment of cancer cell genetics has grown increasingly sophisticated and personalized, current protocols to evaluate the TME have lagged, despite evidence that the TME can be heterogeneous within and between patients. Here, we outline current protocols for PDAC diagnosis and management, review novel biomarkers, and highlight potential opportunities and challenges when evaluating the PDAC TME as we prepare to translate emerging TME-directed therapies to the clinic.

Anatomical and Biological Considerations to Determine Resectability in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains associated with poor outcomes with a 5-year survival of 12% across all stages of the disease. These poor outcomes are driven by a delay in diagnosis and an early propensity for systemic dissemination of the disease. Recently, aggressive surgical approaches involving complex vascular resections and reconstructions have become more common, thus allowing more locally advanced tumors to be resected. Unfortunately, however, even after the completion of surgery and systemic therapy, approximately 40% of patients experience early recurrence of disease. To determine resectability, many institutions utilize anatomical staging systems based on the presence and extent of vascular involvement of major abdominal vessels around the pancreas. However, these classification systems are based on anatomical considerations only and do not factor in the burden of systemic disease. By integrating the biological criteria, we possibly could avoid futile resections often associated with significant morbidity. Especially patients with anatomically resectable disease who have a heavy burden of radiologically undetected systemic disease most likely do not derive a survival benefit from resection. On the contrary, we could offer complex resections to those who have locally advanced or oligometastatic disease but have favorable systemic biology and are most likely to benefit from resection. This review summarizes the current literature on defining anatomical and biological resectability in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Modern Treatment Strategies for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) continues to be a daunting clinical challenge. In 2023, it is estimated that 64,000 people will be newly diagnosed with PDAC and 51,000 people will die from PDAC. By 2030, PDAC is predicted to be the second leading cause of cancer-related death, second only to lung cancer (Siegel et al in, CA Cancer J Clin 73(1):17-48, 2023). It is a disease characterized by its late presentation, rapid demise thereafter, and, until recently, relatively ineffective systemic therapies. Despite this grim prognosis, appreciable progress has been made in the identification of patients with localized disease, who may be candidates for potentially curative resections, and in the understanding of the technical nuances and efficacy of aggressive surgical procedures. Currently, the overall 5-year survival rate is 15-25% for patients who undergo resection and receive adjuvant chemotherapy with or without chemoradiation therapy.

Advances in the management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer remains among the malignancies with the worst outcomes. Survival has been improving, but at a slower rate than other cancers. Multimodal treatment, including chemotherapy, surgical resection, and radiotherapy, has been under investigation for many years. Because of the anatomical characteristics of the pancreas, more emphasis on treatment selection has been placed on local extension into major vessels. Recently, the development of more effective treatment regimens has opened up new treatment strategies, but urgent research questions have also become apparent. This review outlines the current management of pancreatic cancer, and the recent advances in its treatment. The review discusses future treatment pathways aimed at integrating novel findings of translational and clinical research.

Impact of Preoperative Tumor Size on Prognosis of Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinomas

BACKGROUND

Tumor size (TS) is a well-established prognostic factor of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, whether a uniform treatment strategy can be applied for all resectable PDACs (R-PDACs) and borderline resectable PDACs (BR-PDACs), regardless of TS, remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the impact of preoperative TS on surgical outcomes of patients with R-PDACs and BR-PDACs.

METHODS

Chart data from three institutions were reviewed to select patients who underwent pancreatectomy for R-PDACs and BR-PDACs between January 2006 and December 2020. The patients were divided into TSsmall and TSlarge groups according to a TS cutoff value determined for each of R- and BR-PDAC using the minimum P value approach for the risk of R1 resection.

RESULTS

TS of 35 mm and 24 mm was the best cutoff value in R-PDAC and BR-PDAC, respectively. The R1 rate was higher in the TSlarge than TSsmall group, in both R- (n = 35, 37% versus n = 294, 19%; P = 0.011) and BR-PDAC (n = 89, 37% versus n = 27, 15%; P = 0.030). Overall survival was significantly better in the TSsmall than TSlarge group in R-PDAC (38.2 versus 12.1 months; P < 0.001), but comparable between the two groups in BR-DPAC (21.2 versus 22.7 months; P = 0.363). Multivariate analysis revealed TS > 35 mm as an independent predictor of worse survival in patients with R-PDAC.

CONCLUSION

Larger TS was associated with a higher R1 rate and is a worse prognostic factor in patients with R-PDAC.

Currently Debated Topics on Surgical Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Narrative Review on Surgical Treatment of Borderline Resectable, Locally Advanced, and Synchronous or Metachronous Oligometastatic Tumor

BACKGROUND

Previously considered inoperable patients (borderline resectable, locally advanced, synchronous oligometastatic or metachronous pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC)) are starting to become resectable thanks to advances in chemo/radiotherapy and the reduction in operative mortality.

METHODS

This narrative review presents a chosen literature selection, giving a picture of the current state of treatment of these patients.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is generally recognized as the treatment of choice before surgery. However, despite the increased efficacy, the best pathological response is still limited to 10.9-27.9% of patients. There are still limited data on the selection of possible NAT responders and how to diagnose non-responders early. Multidetector computed tomography has high sensitivity and low specificity in evaluating resectability after NAT, limiting the resection rate of resectable patients. Ca 19-9 and Positron emission tomography are giving promising results. The prediction of early recurrence after a radical resection of synchronous or metachronous metastatic PDAC, thus identifying patients with poor prognosis and saving them from a resection of little benefit, is still ongoing, although some promising data are available.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, high-level evidence demonstrating the benefit of the surgical treatment of such patients is still lacking and should not be performed outside of high-volume centers with interdisciplinary teams of surgeons and oncologists.

Tissue Resistance Decrease during Irreversible Electroporation of Pancreatic Cancer as a Biomarker for the Adaptive Immune Response and Survival

PURPOSE

To correlate irreversible electroporation (IRE) procedural resistance changes with survival outcomes and the IRE-induced systemic immune response in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data on IRE procedural tissue resistance (R) features and survival outcomes were collected from patients with LAPC treated within the context of 2 prospective clinical trials in a single tertiary center. Preprocedural and postprocedural peripheral blood samples were prospectively collected for immune monitoring. The change (ie, decrease) in R during the first 10 test pulses (ΔR10p) and during the total procedure (ΔRtotal) were calculated. Patients were divided in 2 groups on the basis of the median change in R (large ΔR vs small ΔR) and compared for differences in overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival and immune cell subsets.

RESULTS

A total of 54 patients were included; of these, 20 underwent immune monitoring. Linear regression modeling showed that the first 10 test pulses reflected the change in tissue resistance during the total procedure appropriately (P < .001; R2 = 0.91). A large change in tissue resistance significantly correlated with a better OS (P = .026) and longer time to disease progression (P = .045). Furthermore, a large change in tissue resistance was associated with CD8+ T cell activation through significant upregulation of Ki-67+ (P = .02) and PD-1+ (P = .047). Additionally, this subgroup demonstrated significantly increased expression of CD80 on conventional dendritic cells (cDC1; P = .027) and PD-L1 on immunosuppressive myeloid-derived suppressor cells (P = .039).

CONCLUSIONS

IRE procedural resistance changes may serve as a biomarker for survival and IRE-induced systemic CD8+ T cell and cDC1 activation.

The diagnostic accuracy of endoscopic ultrasound vs. contrast-enhanced computed tomography in local staging of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a bi-national multicenter study

BACKGROUND

Identification of pancreatic cancer (PC) local invasion is crucial to optimize patients' selection for surgery.

AIMS

To determine the diagnostic accuracy of contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CECT) and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) in local staging of PC.

METHODS

We performed a multicenter study including all patients with PC who underwent surgery.

RESULTS

One hundred twelve patients were included. Surgical findings of peri-pancreatic lymph nodes (LN), vascular and adjacent organ involvement were seen in 67 (59.8%), 33 (29.5%) and 19 patients (17%), respectively. The diagnostic performance of EUS was better than CECT in peri-pancreatic LN. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive (NPV) of CECT vs. EUS were 28.4%, 80%, 67.9% and 42.9% vs. 70.2%, 75.6%, 81% and 63%, respectively. For vascular and adjacent organ involvement, the sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV were 45.5%, 93.7%, 75%, 80.4% and 31.6%, 89.2%, 37.5% and 86.5% for CECT, respectively, vs. 63.6%, 93.7%, 80.8%, 86.1% and 36.8%, 94.6%, 58.3% and 88% for EUS, respectively. Combining both CECT and EUS, the sensitivity for peri-pancreatic LN, vascular and adjacent organ involvement improved (76.1%, 78.8% and 42%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

EUS was superior to CECT in local staging. Combined EUS and CECT had a higher sensitivity than either alone.

Survival Benefit after Shifting from Upfront Surgery to Neoadjuvant Treatment in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

According to the 2016 National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) should receive chemotherapy as the first-line treatment. This study examined the real-world survival benefits of modifying BRPC treatment guidelines. Patients treated for BRPC at a single institution from 2013 to 2015 (pre-guideline group) and 2017 to 2019 (post-guideline group) were retrospectively reviewed. According to the treatment method used, patients were classified into upfront surgery (US), surgery after neoadjuvant treatment (NAT), and chemotherapy only (CO) groups. Overall survival (OS) was compared according to period and treatment type. Factors associated with OS were analyzed using a Cox regression model. Among the 165 patients, 63 were in the pre-guideline group and 102 patients were in the post-guideline group. The median OS was significantly improved in the post-guideline group compared to the pre-guideline group (29 vs. 13 months, p < 0.001). According to the treatment method, the median OS of the NAT group was significantly longer than that of the US and CO groups (40 vs. 16 vs. 15 months, respectively, p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis, tumor size, differentiation, NAT, and perineural invasion were significant prognostic factors. NAT is an important treatment option for BRPC and increased patient survival in the real world.

Can STEreotactic Body Radiation Therapy (SBRT) Improve the Prognosis of Unresectable Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer? Long-Term Clinical Outcomes, Toxicity and Prognostic Factors on 142 Patients (STEP Study)

AIM

The gold standard of care for pancreatic adenocarcinoma is the integrated treatment of surgery and chemotherapy (ChT), but about 50% of patients present with unresectable disease. Our study evaluated the efficacy in terms of local control, survival and safety of stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

METHODS

A retrospective study (STEP study) analyzed patients with LAPC treated with a dose of 45 Gy in 6 fractions. Local control (LC), distant progression free survival (DPFS), overall survival (OS) and toxicity were analyzed according to the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

A total of 142 patients were evaluated. Seventy-six patients (53.5%) received induction ChT before SBRT. The median follow-up was 11 months. One-, 2- and 3-year LC rate was 81.9%, 69.1% and 58.5%. Median DPFS was 6.03 months; 1- and 2-year DPFS rate was 19.9% and 4.5%. Median OS was 11.6 months and 1-, 2- and 3-year OS rates were 45.4%, 16.1%, and 9.8%. At univariate analysis, performed by the log-rank test, age < 70 years (p = 0.037), pre-SBRT ChT (p = 0.004) and post-SBRT ChT (p = 0.019) were associated with better OS. No patients experienced G3 toxicity.

CONCLUSION

SBRT represents an effective and safe therapeutic option in the multimodal treatment of patients with LAPC in terms of increased LC. When SBRT was sequentially integrated with ChT, the treatment proved to be promising in terms of OS as well.

An analysis of time to treatment in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Currently, no guidelines exist regarding the appropriate time from diagnosis to treatment among pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients. Herein, we aim to define the median time to treatment in pancreatic adenocarcinoma, factors associated with treatment delay, and prognostic significance.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of pancreatic adenocarcinoma patients, stage I-IV, at a tertiary referral center (2017-2020). We subdivided time to treatment (days) into 4 components: (1) Ti: symptom onset to initial provider evaluation, (2) Tii: initial provider evaluation to diagnosis, (3) Tiii: diagnosis to specialist consultation, (4) Tiv: specialist visit to treatment.

RESULTS

In total, 217 patients met the inclusion criteria. The median Ti, Tii, Tiii, and Tiv were 20, 12, 4, and 14 days, respectively. The total time to treatment was 75 days. Patients with weight loss had longer Ti (β = 108.6). More frequent hospitalizations (β = 19.5) and misdiagnosis (β = 33.4) were associated with longer Tii. Patients with a history of malignancy (β = 15) or active treatment of a second disease (β = 19.4) had longer Tiii. Poor performance status (β = 6.2) or private insurance (β = 50.2) were associated with a longer Tiv. Black patients had longer Ti+ii+iii+iv (β = 100). Time to treatment was not associated with overall survival (P > .05).

CONCLUSION

It takes a median time of less than a month for a patient with pancreatic adenocarcinoma to start treatment, even after they visit a primary provider. The greatest opportunity to shorten the overall time to treatment is by having patients seek medical attention earlier (Ti).

Recent Advancements in Electroporation Technologies: From Bench to Clinic

Over the past decade, the increased adoption of electroporation-based technologies has led to an expansion of clinical research initiatives. Electroporation has been utilized in molecular biology for mammalian and bacterial transfection; for food sanitation; and in therapeutic settings to increase drug uptake, for gene therapy, and to eliminate cancerous tissues. We begin this article by discussing the biophysics required for understanding the concepts behind the cell permeation phenomenon that is electroporation. We then review nano- and microscale single-cell electroporation technologies before scaling up to emerging in vivo applications.

Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer

Patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are best treated with surgical resection of the primary tumour and systemic chemotherapy, which provides considerably longer overall survival (OS) durations than either modality alone. Regardless, most patients will have disease relapse owing to micrometastatic disease. Although currently a matter of some debate, considerable research interest has been focused on the role of neoadjuvant therapy for all forms of resectable PDAC. Whilst adjuvant combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for patients with resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy seems to improve OS without necessarily increasing the resection rate in those with borderline-resectable disease. Furthermore, around 20% of patients with unresectable non-metastatic PDAC might undergo resection following 4-6 months of induction combination chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy, even in the absence of a clear radiological response, leading to improved OS outcomes in this group. Distinct molecular and biological responses to different types of therapies need to be better understood in order to enable the optimal sequencing of specific treatment modalities to further improve OS. In this Review, we describe current treatment strategies for the various clinical stages of PDAC and discuss developments that are likely to determine the optimal sequence of multimodality therapies by integrating the fundamental clinical and molecular features of the cancer.

Preoperative treatments in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: current evidence and new perspectives

Surgery is the only curative treatment for non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but less than 20% of patients present a resectable disease at diagnosis. Treatment strategies and disease definition for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) vary in the different cancer centres. Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) is the standard of care for both BRPC and LAPC patients, however literature data are still controversial concerning the type, dose and duration of the different CT regimens, as well as regarding the integration of radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT) in the therapeutic algorithm. In this unsettled debate, we aimed at focusing on the therapeutic regimens currently in use and relative literature data, to report international trials comparing the available therapeutic options or explore the introduction of new pharmacological agents, and to analyse possible new scenarios in microenvironment evaluation before and after neoadjuvant therapies or in patients' selection at a molecular level.

Innovative Imaging Techniques Used to Evaluate Borderline-Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

A diagnosis of pancreatic cancer carries a 5-y survival rate of less than 10%. Furthermore, the detection of pancreatic cancer occurs most often in later stages of the disease due to its location in the retroperitoneum and lack of symptoms (in most cases) until tumors become more advanced. Once diagnosed, cross-sectional imaging techniques are heavily utilized to determine the tumor stage and the potential for surgical resection. However, a major determinant of resectability is the extent of local vascular involvement of the mesenteric vessels and critical tributaries; current imaging techniques have limited capacity to accurately determine vascular involvement. Surrounding inflammation and fibrosis can be difficult to discriminate from viable tumor, making determination of the degree of vascular involvement unreliable. New innovations in fluorescence and optoacoustic imaging techniques may overcome these limitations and make determination of resectability more accurate. These imaging modalities are able to more clearly discern between viable tumor tissue and non-neoplastic inflammation or desmoplasia, allowing clinicians to more reliably characterize vascular involvement and develop individualized treatment plans for patients. This review will discuss the current imaging techniques used to diagnose pancreatic cancer, the barriers that current techniques raise to accurate staging, and novel fluorescence and optoacoustic imaging techniques that may provide more accurate clinical staging of pancreatic cancer.

Technical options in surgery for artery-involving pancreatic cancer: Invasion depth matters

Background

The artery involvement explains the majority of primary unresectability of non-metastatic pancreatic cancer patients and both arterial resection and artery-sparing dissection techniques are utilized in curative-intent pancreatectomies for artery-involving pancreatic cancer (ai-PC) patients.

Methods

This narrative review summarized the history of resectability evaluation for ai-PC and attempted to interpret its current pitfalls that led to the divergence of resectability prediction and surgical exploration, with a focus on the rationale and the surgical outcomes of the sub-adventitial divestment technique.

Results

The circumferential involvement of artery by tumor currently defined the resectability of ai-PC but insufficient to preclude laparotomy with curative intent. The reasons behind could be: 1. The radiographic involvement of tumor to arterial circumference was not necessarily resulted in histopathological artery wall invasion; 2. the developed surgical techniques facilitated radical resection, better perioperative safety as well as oncological benefit. The feasibility of periadventitial dissection, sub-adventitial divestment and other artery-sparing techniques for ai-PC depended on the tumor invasion depth to the artery, i.e., whether the external elastic lamina (EEL) was invaded demonstrating a hallmark plane for sub-adventitial dissections. These techniques were reported to be complicated with preferable surgical outcomes comparing to arterial resection combined pancreatectomies, while the arterial resection combined pancreatectomies were considered performed in patients with more advanced disease.

Conclusions

Adequate preoperative imaging modalities with which to evaluate the tumor invasion depth to the artery are to be developed. Survival benefits after these techniques remain to be proven, with more and higher-level clinical evidence needed.

Key message

The current resectability evaluation criteria, which were based on radiographic circumferential involvement of the artery by tumor, was insufficient to preclude curative-intent pancreatectomies for artery-involving pancreatic cancer patients. With oncological benefit to be further proven, periarterial dissection and arterial resection have different but overlapping indications, and predicting the tumor invasion depth in major arteries was critical for surgical planning.

Impact of margin accentuation with intraoperative irreversible electroporation on local recurrence in resected pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rates of local recurrence and margin positivity in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer after pancreatectomy with or without irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation.

METHODS

Prospective data for preoperative stages IIB (borderline resectable) and III were evaluated, with 75 patients undergoing pancreatectomy with irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation compared to 71 patients who underwent pancreatectomy alone from March 2010 to November 2020.

RESULTS

Both irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation and pancreatectomy-alone groups were similar for body mass index, Charleston comorbidity index, and sex. The irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation group had significantly greater preoperative stage III (irreversible electroporation 83% vs pancreatectomy alone 51%; P = .0001), with similar tumor location (head 64% vs 72%) and tumor size (median 2.9 vs 2.8). Neoadjuvant/induction chemotherapy and prior radiation therapy was similar in both groups (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 89% vs 72%). Surgical therapy included a greater percentage of pancreaticoduodenectomy in the pancreatectomy-alone group. Despite greater stage and greater percentage of margin positivity (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 27% vs 20%; P = not significant), rates of local recurrence were similar. The mean disease-free interval for local recurrence from time of diagnosis was similar (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 15.8 vs 16.5 pancreatectomy alone; P = not significant) and time of treatment (irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation 9.4 vs 10.5 months; P = not significant). Overall survival was improved with the irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation group, with a mean of 34.2 months versus 27.9 months in the pancreatectomy-alone group.

CONCLUSION

Irreversible electroporation with margin accentuation is safe and effective in stages IIB and III pancreatic adenocarcinomas that are technically resectable. Despite higher margin positivity rates, the time to local recurrence and the effects of recurrence were the same in the pancreatectomy-alone group.

Validation of a Resectability Scoring System for Prediction of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Surgical Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The most used pancreatic cancer (PC) resectability criteria are descriptive in nature or based solely on dichotomous degree of involvement (< 180° or > 180°) of vessels, which allows for a high degree of subjectivity and inconsistency.

METHODS

Radiographic measurements of the circumferential degree and length of tumor contact with major peripancreatic vessels were retrospectively obtained from pre-treatment multi-detector computed tomography (MDCT) images from PC patients treated between 2001 and 2015 at two large academic institutions. Arterial and venous scores were calculated for each patient, then tested for a correlation with tumor resection and R0 resection.

RESULTS

The analysis included 466 patients. Arterial and venous scores were highly predictive of resection and R0 resection in both the training (n = 294) and validation (n = 172) cohorts. A recursive partitioning tree based on arterial and venous score cutoffs developed with the training cohort was able to stratify patients of the validation cohort into discrete groups with distinct resectability probabilities. A refined recursive partitioning tree composed of three resectability groups was generated, with probabilities of resection and R0 resection of respectively 94 and 73% for group A, 61 and 35% for group B, and 4 and 2% for group C. This resectability scoring system (RSS) was highly prognostic, predicting median overall survival times of 27, 18.9, and 13.5 months respectively for patients in RSS groups A, B, and C (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed RSS was highly predictive of resection, R0 resection, and prognosis for patients with PC when tested against an external dataset.

Prognosis of Pancreatic Cancer Based on Resectability: A Single Center Experience

Although conversion surgery has increasingly been performed for initially unresectable advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), the rate of conversion, including that for patients who do not undergo resection, remains unclear. Patients with PDAC who were treated between January 2013 and December 2018 were classified into three groups: resectable (R), borderline resectable (BR), and unresectable (UR). We analyzed patient outcomes, including the rate of surgical resection and survival, in each of these groups. In total, 211 patients (R, 118; BR, 22; UR, 81) were selected. Among them, 117 (99%), 18 (82%), and 15 (19%) patients in the R, BR, and UR groups, respectively, underwent surgical resection. R0 resection rates were 88, 78, and 67%, whereas median overall survival (OS) from treatment initiation were 31, 18, and 11 months (p < 0.0001) in the R, BR, and UR groups, respectively. In patients who underwent surgical resection, relapse-free survival (RFS) and OS were similar among the three groups (R vs. BR vs. UR; median RFS (months), 17 vs. 13 vs. 11, p = 0.249; median OS (months), 31 vs. 26 vs. 32, p = 0.742). Lymph node metastases and incomplete adjuvant chemotherapy were identified as independent prognostic factors for OS. Although the surgical resection rate was low, particularly in the BR and UR groups, the prognosis of patients who underwent surgical resection was similar irrespective of the initial resectability status.

Validation of the Anatomical and Biological Definitions of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer According to the 2017 International Consensus for Survival and Recurrence in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Upfront Surgery

BACKGROUND

The International Consensus Criteria (ICC) (2017) redefined patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) according to anatomical, biological, and conditional aspects. However, these new criteria have not been validated comprehensively. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to validate the anatomical and biological definitions of BR-PDAC for oncological outcomes in patients with resectable (R) and BR-PDAC undergoing upfront surgery.

METHODS

A total of 404 patients who underwent upfront surgery for R- and BR-PDAC from 2004 to 2020 were included. The patients were classified according to the ICC as follows: resectable (R) (n = 259), anatomical borderline (BR-A) (n = 43), biological borderline (BR-B) (n = 81), and anatomical and biologic borderline (BR-AB) (n = 21).

RESULTS

Compared with the R and BR-B groups, the BR-A and BR-AB groups had higher postoperative complication rates (16.5% and 27.2% vs 32.5% and 33.4%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower R0 resection rates (85.7% and 80.2% vs 65.1% and 61.9%; P = 0.003). In contrast, compared with the R and BR-A groups, the BR-B (32.1%) and BR-AB (57.1%) groups had higher early recurrence rates (within postoperative 6 months) (16.5% and 25.6% vs 32.1% and 57.1%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower 3-year recurrence-free survival rates (36.1% and 20.7% vs 12.1% and 7.8%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Anatomically defined BR-PDAC was associated with a higher risk of margin-positive resection and postoperative complication rates, while biologically defined BR-PDAC was associated with higher early recurrence rates and lower survival rates. Thus, the anatomical and biological definitions are useful in predicting the prognosis and determining the usefulness of neoadjuvant therapy.

Tumor size measurements of pancreatic cancer with neoadjuvant therapy based on RECIST guidelines: is MRI as effective as CT?

OBJECTIVES

To compare tumor size measurements using CT and MRI in pancreatic cancer (PC) patients with neoadjuvant therapy (NAT).

METHODS

This study included 125 histologically confirmed PC patients who underwent NAT. The tumor sizes from CT and MRI before and after NAT were compared by using Bland-Altman analyses and intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). Variations in tumor size estimates between MRI and CT in relationship to different factors, including NAT methods (chemotherapy, chemoradiotherapy), tumor locations (head/neck, body/tail), tumor regression grade (TRG) levels (0-2, 3), N stages (N0, N1/N2) and tumor resection margin status (R0, R1), were further analysed. The McNemar test was used to compare the efficacy of NAT evaluations based on the CT and MRI measurements according to RECIST 1.1 criteria.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between the median tumor sizes from CT and MRI before and after NAT (P = 0.44 and 0.39, respectively). There was excellent agreement in tumor size between MRI and CT, with mean size differences and limits of agreement (LOAs) of 1.5 [-9.6 to 12.7] mm and 0.9 [-12.6 to 14.5] mm before NAT (ICC, 0.93) and after NAT (ICC, 0.91), respectively. For all the investigated factors, there was good or excellent correlation (ICC, 0.76 to 0.95) for tumor sizes between CT and MRI. There was no significant difference in the efficacy evaluation of NAT between CT and MRI measurements (P = 1.0).

CONCLUSION

MRI and CT have similar performance in assessing PC tumor size before and after NAT.

Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO): Clinical guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer-related mortality in both developed and developing countries. The incidence of pancreatic cancer in China accounts for about a quater of the global incidence, and the epidemiological characteristics and therapeutic strategies differ due to social, economic, cultural, environmental, and public health factors. Non-domestic guidelines do not reflect the clinicopathologic characteristics and treatment patterns of Chinese patients. Thus, in 2018, the Chinese Society of Clinical Oncology (CSCO) organized a panel of senior experts from all sub-specialties within the field of pancreatic oncology to compile the Chinese guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer. The guidelines were made based on both the Western and Eastern clinical evidence and updated every one or two years. The experts made consensus judgments and classified evidence-based recommendations into various grades according to the regional differences, the accessibility of diagnostic and treatment resources, and health economic indexes in China. Here we present the latest version of the guidelines, which covers the diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of pancreatic cancer. The guidelines might standardize the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer in China and will encourage oncologists to design and conduct more clinical trials about pancreatic cancer.

Differentiation between Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma and Normal Pancreatic Tissue for Treatment Response Assessment using Multi-Scale Texture Analysis of CT Images

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is the most prevalent type of pancreas cancer with a high mortality rate and its staging is highly dependent on the extent of involvement between the tumor and surrounding vessels, facilitating treatment response assessment in PDAC.

Objective

This study aims at detecting and visualizing the tumor region and the surrounding vessels in PDAC CT scan since, despite the tumors in other abdominal organs, clear detection of PDAC is highly difficult.

Material and Methods

This retrospective study consists of three stages: 1) a patch-based algorithm for differentiation between tumor region and healthy tissue using multi-scale texture analysis along with L1-SVM (Support Vector Machine) classifier, 2) a voting-based approach, developed on a standard logistic function, to mitigate false detections, and 3) 3D visualization of the tumor and the surrounding vessels using ITK-SNAP software.

Results

The results demonstrate that multi-scale texture analysis strikes a balance between recall and precision in tumor and healthy tissue differentiation with an overall accuracy of 0.78±0.12 and a sensitivity of 0.90±0.09 in PDAC.

Conclusion

Multi-scale texture analysis using statistical and wavelet-based features along with L1-SVM can be employed to differentiate between healthy and pancreatic tissues. Besides, 3D visualization of the tumor region and surrounding vessels can facilitate the assessment of treatment response in PDAC. However, the 3D visualization software must be further developed for integrating with clinical applications.

Routine neoadjuvant chemotherapy for all patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? A review of the evidence

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy that carries a poor prognosis because the majority of patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease. However, even patients who are fortunate enough to present with resectable disease are often plagued by high recurrence rates. While adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to decrease the risk of recurrence after surgery, post operative complications and poor performance status after surgery prevent up to 50% of patients from receiving it. Given the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with borderline resectable disease, it is understandable that neoadjuvant therapy has been steadily increasing in patients with resectable cancers as well. In this review paper, we highlight the rational and existing evidence of using neoadjuvant therapy in all patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background and Objectives

Neoadjuvant therapy plays an increasingly important role in pancreatic neuroendocrine neoplasms (pNENs), but the systematic evaluation of its efficacy is still lacking. The purpose of this study is to explore the role of neoadjuvant therapy in pNENs.

Methods

We systematically reviewed the literatures published online until October 1, 2021. Meta-analysis was conducted to generate proportion with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) for tumor response, resection rate, R0 resection rate and survival time.

Results

Nine studies with 468 patients were involved in the systematic review. None of these patients met complete response (CR). Furthermore, 43.6% (95% CI [18.1, 69.0]) patients were expected to achieve partial response (PR), 51.3% (95% CI [27.9, 78.3]) to stable disease (SD), and 4.3% (95% CI [0.7, 7.9]) to progressive disease (PD). The estimate resection rate and R0 resection rate after neoadjuvant therapy were 68.2% (95% CI [44.5, 91.9]) and 60.2% (95% CI [53.5, 66.9]), respectively. There was no significant difference in resection rate between different chemotherapy regimens (41.67% vs 33.93%, P=0.453), as well as R0 resection rate (62.50% vs 68.30%, P=0.605). In terms of objective response rate (ORR), there was no significant difference between CAPTEM and FAS (41.67% vs 33.93%, P=0.453), while PRRT showed a higher ORR compared with chemotherapy, although there was also no statistical difference (49.06% vs 36.96%, P=0.154).

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant therapies could reduce the tumor size and stage of some borderline resectable or unresectable pNENs, and give some patients the chance of radical resection. However, according to the current data, the best treatment regimen for pNENs neoadjuvant therapy is still unknown.

Pancreatic cancer survival trends in the US from 2001 to 2014: a CONCORD-3 study

BACKGROUND

Survival from pancreatic cancer is low worldwide. In the US, the 5-year relative survival has been slightly higher for women, whites and younger patients than for their counterparts, and differences in age and stage at diagnosis [Corrections added Nov 16, 2022, after first online publication: a new affiliation is added to Maja Nikšić] may contribute to this pattern. We aimed to examine trends in survival by race, stage, age and sex for adults (15-99 years) diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in the US.

METHODS

This population-based study included 399,427 adults registered with pancreatic cancer in 41 US state cancer registries during 2001-2014, with follow-up to December 31, 2014. We estimated age-specific and age-standardized net survival at 1 and 5 years.

RESULTS

Overall, 12.3% of patients were blacks, and 84.2% were whites. About 9.5% of patients were diagnosed with localized disease, but 50.5% were diagnosed at an advanced stage; slightly more among blacks, mainly among men. No substantial changes were seen over time (2001-2003, 2004-2008, 2009-2014). In general, 1-year net survival was higher in whites than in blacks (26.1% vs. 22.1% during 2001-2003, 35.1% vs. 31.4% during 2009-2014). This difference was particularly evident among patients with localized disease (49.6% in whites vs. 44.6% in blacks during 2001-2003, 60.1% vs. 55.3% during 2009-2014). The survival gap between blacks and whites with localized disease was persistent at 5 years after diagnosis, and it widened over time (from 24.0% vs. 21.3% during 2001-2003 to 39.7% vs. 31.0% during 2009-2014). The survival gap was wider among men than among women.

CONCLUSIONS

Gaps in 1- and 5-year survival between blacks and whites were persistent throughout 2001-2014, especially for patients diagnosed with a localized tumor, for which surgery is currently the only treatment modality with the potential for cure.