Pathology reporting of margin status in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: challenges and uncertainties

Imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - An update for all stages of patient management

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a common and lethal cancer. From diagnosis to disease staging, response to neoadjuvant therapy assessment and patient surveillance after resection, imaging plays a central role, guiding the multidisciplinary team in decision-planning.

Review aims and findings

This review discusses the most up-to-date imaging recommendations, typical and atypical findings, and issues related to each step of patient management. Example cases for each relevant condition are presented, and a structured report for disease staging is suggested.

Conclusion

Despite current issues in PDAC imaging at different stages of patient management, the radiologist is essential in the multidisciplinary team, as the conveyor of relevant imaging findings crucial for patient care.

Comparison of prognosis and postoperative morbidities between standard pancreaticoduodenectomy and the TRIANGLE technique for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Radical surgery combined with systemic chemotherapy offers the possibility of long-term survival or even cure for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), although tumor recurrence, especially locally, still inhibits the treatment efficacy. The TRIANGLE technique was introduced as an extended dissection procedure to improve the R0 resection rate of borderline resectable or locally advanced PDAC. However, there was a lack of studies concerning postoperative complications and long-term outcomes of this procedure on patients with resectable PDAC.

AIM

To compare the prognosis and postoperative morbidities between standard pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and the TRIANGLE technique for resectable PDAC.

METHODS

Patients with resectable PDAC eligible for PD from our hospital between June 2018 and December 2021 were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. All the patients were divided into PDstandard and PDTRIANGLE groups according to the surgical procedure. Baseline characteristics, surgical data, and postoperative morbidities were recorded. All of the patients were followed up, and the date and location of tumor recurrence, and death were recorded. The Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test were used for the survival analysis.

RESULTS

There were 93 patients included in the study and 37 underwent the TRIANGLE technique. Duration of operation was longer in the PDTRIANGLE group compared with the PDstandard group [440 (410-480) min vs 320 (265-427) min] (P = 0.001). Intraoperative blood loss [700 (500-1200) mL vs 500 (300-800) mL] (P = 0.009) and blood transfusion [975 (0-1250) mL vs 400 (0-800) mL] (P = 0.009) were higher in the PDTRIANGLE group. There was a higher incidence of surgical site infection (43.2% vs 12.5%) (P = 0.001) and postoperative diarrhea (54.1% vs 12.5%) (P = 0.001) in the PDTRIANGLE group. The rates of R0 resection and local recurrence, overall survival, and disease-free survival did not differ significantly between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

The TRIANGLE technique is safe, with acceptable postoperative morbidities compared with standardized PD, but it does not improve prognosis for patients with resectable PDAC.

Prognostic impact of resection margin status on survival after neoadjuvant treatment for pancreatic cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A greater than 1 mm tumour-free resection margin (R0 >1 mm) is a prognostic factor in upfront-resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. After neoadjuvant treatment (NAT); however, the prognostic impact of resection margin (R) status remains controversial.

METHODS

Randomised and non-randomised studies assessing the association of R status and survival in resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after NAT were sought by systematic searches of MEDLINE, Web of Science and CENTRAL. Hazard ratios (HR) and their corresponding 95% CI were collected to generate log HR using the inverse-variance method. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed and the results presented as weighted HR. Sensitivity and meta-regression analyses were conducted to account for different surgical procedures and varying length of follow-up, respectively.

RESULTS

Twenty-two studies with a total of 4929 patients were included. Based on univariable data, R0 greater than 1 mm was significantly associated with prolonged overall survival (OS) (HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.57-1.97; P<0.00001) and disease-free survival (DFS) (HR 1.66, 95% CI 1.39-1.97; P<0.00001). Using adjusted data, R0 greater than 1 mm was significantly associated with prolonged OS (HR 1.65, 95% CI 1.39-1.97; P<0.00001) and DFS (HR 1.76, 95% CI 1.30-2.39; P=0.0003). Results for R1 direct were comparable in the entire cohort; however, no prognostic impact was detected in sensitivity analysis including only partial pancreatoduodenectomies.

CONCLUSION

After NAT, a tumour-free margin greater than 1 mm is independently associated with improved OS as well as DFS in patients undergoing surgical resection for pancreatic cancer.

Nationwide Impact of Centralization, Neoadjuvant Therapy, Minimally Invasive Surgery, and Standardized Pathology Reporting on R0 Resection and Overall Survival in Pancreatoduodenectomy for Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Surgeons aim for R0 resection in patients with pancreatic cancer to improve overall survival. However, it is unclear whether recent changes in pancreatic cancer care such as centralization, increased use of neoadjuvant therapy, minimally invasive surgery, and standardized pathology reporting have influenced R0 resections and whether R0 resection remains associated with overall survival.

METHODS

This nationwide retrospective cohort study included consecutive patients after pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic cancer from the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Database (2009-2019). R0 resection was defined as > 1 mm tumor clearance at the pancreatic, posterior, and vascular resection margins. Completeness of pathology reporting was scored on the basis of six elements: histological diagnosis, tumor origin, radicality, tumor size, extent of invasion, and lymph node examination.

RESULTS

Among 2955 patients after PD for pancreatic cancer, the R0 resection rate was 49%. The R0 resection rate decreased from 68 to 43% (2009-2019, P < 0.001). The extent of resections in high-volume hospitals, minimally invasive surgery, neoadjuvant therapy, and complete pathology reports all significantly increased over time. Only complete pathology reporting was independently associated with lower R0 rates (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.69-0.83, P < 0.001). Higher hospital volume, neoadjuvant therapy, and minimally invasive surgery were not associated with R0. R0 resection remained independently associated with improved overall survival (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.66-0.79, P < 0.001), as well as in the 214 patients after neoadjuvant treatment (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.42-0.87, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

The nationwide rate of R0 resections after PD for pancreatic cancer decreased over time, mostly related to more complete pathology reporting. R0 resection remained associated with overall survival.

Ex vivo 3D scanning and specimen mapping in anatomic pathology

Structured light three-dimensional (3D) scanning is a ubiquitous mainstay of object inspection and quality control in industrial manufacturing, and has recently been integrated into various medical disciplines. Photorealistic 3D scans can readily be acquired from fresh or formalin-fixed tissue and have potential for use within anatomic pathology (AP) in a variety of scenarios, ranging from direct clinical care to documentation and education. Methods for scanning and post-processing of fresh surgical specimens rely on relatively low-cost and technically simple procedures. Here, we demonstrate potential use of 3D scanning in surgical pathology in the form of a mixed media pathology report with a novel post-scan virtual inking and marking technique to precisely demarcate areas of tissue sectioning and details of final tumor and margin status. We display a sample mixed-media pathology report (3D specimen map) which integrates 3D and conventional pathology reporting methods. Finally, we describe the potential utility of 3D specimen modeling in both didactic and experiential teaching of gross pathology lab procedures.

RNF26 Promotes Pancreatic Cancer Proliferation by Enhancing RBM38 Degradation

OBJECTIVES

RING finger protein 26 (RNF26) plays an essential role in determining malignant tumor growth, whereas the role of which in pancreatic cancer (PC) has not been reported. This study aimed to investigate the role of RNF26 in PC cells.

METHODS

The Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis was applied to study the role of RNF26 in malignant tumors. The in vitro or in vivo cell proliferation assays were used to investigate the role of RNF26 on the PC. The protein-protein interaction network analysis was used to search the binding partner of RNF26. The Western blot was used to reveal whether RNF26 promoted RNA binding motif protein-38 (RBM38) degradation in PC cells.

RESULTS

The Gene Expression Profiling Interactive Analysis tool showed that RNF26 was overexpressed in PC. Repressing RNF26 expression decreased PC cells growth, but overexpression of RNF26 increased PC proliferation. Furthermore, we demonstrated RNF26 degraded RBM38 to promote PC cell proliferation.

CONCLUSIONS

RNF26 was abnormally increased in PC, and upregulated RNF26 was correlated with a poor prognosis. RNF26 enhanced PC proliferation by inducing RBM38 degradation. We identified a novel RNF26-RBM28 axis involved in the progression of PC.

Prognostic Impact of Resection Margin Status on Distal Pancreatectomy for Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic cancer is associated with a poor prognosis. While surgical resection is the only treatment option with curative intent, most patients die of locoregional and/or distant recurrence. The prognostic impact of the resection margin status has received much attention. However, the evidence is almost exclusively related to pancreatoduodenectomies, while corresponding data for distal pancreatectomy specimens are limited. The key data, such as the rate of microscopic margin involvement (“R1”), the site of margin involvement, and the impact of R1 on patient outcome, are divergent between studies and do not currently allow any general conclusions. The main reasons for the variability in the published data are the small size of the study cohorts and their heterogeneity, as well as the marked divergence in pathology examination practices. The latter is a consequence of the lack of concrete guidance, both for grossing and microscopic examination. The increasing administration of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy introduces a further factor of uncertainty as the conventional definition of a tumour-free margin (“R0”) based on 1 mm clearance is inadequate for these specimens. This review discusses the published data regarding the prognostic impact of margin status in distal pancreatectomy specimens along with the challenges and uncertainties that are related to the assessment of the margins.

Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy After (m)FOLFIRINOX for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A TAPS Consortium Study

BACKGROUND

The value of neoadjuvant radiotherapy (RT) after 5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan, with or without dose modifications [(m)FOLFIRINOX], for patients with borderline resectable (BR) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is uncertain.

METHODS

We conducted an international retrospective cohort study including consecutive patients with BR PDAC who received (m)FOLFIRINOX as initial treatment (2012-2019) from the Trans-Atlantic Pancreatic Surgery Consortium. Because the decision to administer RT is made after chemotherapy, patients with metastases or deterioration after (m)FOLFIRINOX or a performance score ≥2 were excluded. Patients who received RT after (m)FOLFIRINOX were matched 1:1 by nearest neighbor propensity scores with patients who did not receive RT. Propensity scores were calculated using sex, age (≤70 vs >70 years), WHO performance score (0 vs 1), tumor size (0-20 vs 21-40 vs >40 mm), tumor location (head/uncinate vs body/tail), number of cycles (1-4 vs 5-8 vs >8), and baseline CA 19-9 level (≤500 vs >500 U/mL). Primary outcome was overall survival (OS) from diagnosis.

RESULTS

Of 531 patients who received neoadjuvant (m)FOLFIRINOX for BR PDAC, 424 met inclusion criteria and 300 (70.8%) were propensity score-matched. After matching, median OS was 26.2 months (95% CI, 24.0-38.4) with RT versus 32.8 months (95% CI, 25.3-42.0) without RT (P=.71). RT was associated with a lower resection rate (55.3% vs 72.7%; P=.002). In patients who underwent a resection, RT was associated with a comparable margin-negative resection rate (>1 mm) (70.6% vs 64.8%; P=.51), more node-negative disease (57.3% vs 37.6%; P=.01), and more major pathologic response with <5% tumor viability (24.7% vs 8.3%; P=.006). The OS associated with conventional and stereotactic body RT approaches was similar (median OS, 25.7 vs 26.0 months; P=.92).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with BR PDAC, neoadjuvant RT following (m)FOLFIRINOX was associated with more node-negative disease and better pathologic response in patients who underwent resection, yet no difference in OS was found. Routine use of RT cannot be recommended based on these data.