Gemcitabine-Based Neoadjuvant Treatment in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Meta-Analysis of Individual Patient Data

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is associated with improved disease-free survival in pancreatic cancer patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy with vascular resection

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is becoming favored for all pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Patients with seemingly resectable disease infrequently still display vascular involvement intraoperatively. Outcomes following NAC versus upfront surgery in patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) with vascular resection are unknown.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of PDAC patients who underwent PD with vascular resection between January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2020, within a single academic center. Clinicopathologic characteristics and disease-free survival (DFS) were compared between NAC versus upfront surgery cohorts using the Kaplan-Meier estimate and Cox proportional-hazards regression model.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients who underwent PD with vascular resection for PDAC were included. Forty-six patients (56%) received NAC. The NAC cohort more often had pathologic N0 status (47.8% vs. 8.6%, p < 0.001), had decreased vascular invasion (11% vs. 40%, p = 0.002), and completed chemotherapy (80% vs. 40%, p < 0.01). The NAC cohort demonstrated improved DFS (40.5 vs. 14.3 months, p = 0.007). In multivariable analysis, NAC remained independently associated with increased DFS (HR = 0.48, p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC was associated with improved clinicopathologic outcomes and DFS in PD with vascular resection. These findings demonstrate the advantage of NAC in PDAC patients undergoing PD with vascular resection.

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.

The Impact of Post-Pancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP) on Long-Term Outcomes after Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Single-Center Propensity-Score-Matched Analysis According to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) Definition

Post-pancreatectomy acute pancreatitis (PPAP) is a potentially life-threating complication. Although multiple authors demonstrated PPAP as a predisposing feature for a more detrimental clinical course, no evidence is currently present on its potential impact on long-term outcomes. The aim of this study is to evaluate how PPAP onset may influence overall (OS) and disease-free survival (DSF) after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Patients who underwent PD for PDAC from 2006 to 2021 were enrolled. PPAP was defined according to the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS) definition. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed in order to reduce potential selection biases. After PSM, 32 patients out of 231 PDs who developed PPAP (PPAP group) were matched to 32 patients who did not present PPAP (no-PPAP group). PPAP patients more frequently presented major post-operative complications (p = 0.02) and post-operative pancreatic fistula (POPF) (p = 0.003). Median follow-up was 26.2 months, with no difference between the two groups (p = 0.79). A comparable rate of local or distant metastases was noted in the two cohorts (p = 0.2). Five-year OS was comparable between the two populations (39.3% and 35.7% for the no-PPAP and PPAP populations, respectively; p = 0.53). Conversely, despite not being statistically significant, a worse 5-year DFS was evidenced in the case of PPAP (23.2%) as compared to the absence of PPAP (37.4%) (p = 0.51). With the limitations due to the small sample size, PPAP may potentially relate to worse long-term outcomes in terms of DFS. However, further studies with wider study populations are still needed in order to better clarify the prognostic role of PPAP.

Multidisciplinary team diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer: Current landscape and future prospects

The pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer has not been completely clear, there is no highly sensitive and specific detection method, so early diagnosis is very difficult. Despite the rapid development of tumor diagnosis and treatment, it is difficult to break through in the short term and the overall 5-year survival rate of pancreatic cancer is less than 8%. In the face of the increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, in addition to strengthening basic research, exploring its etiology and pathogenesis, it is urgent to optimize the existing diagnosis and treatment methods through standard multidisciplinary team (MDT), and formulate personalized treatment plan to achieve the purpose of improving the curative effect. However, there are some problems in MDT, such as insufficient understanding and enthusiasm of some doctors, failure to operate MDT according to the system, lack of good communication between domestic and foreign peers, and lack of attention in personnel training and talent echelon construction. It is expected to protect the rights and interests of doctors in the future and ensure the continuous operation of MDT. To strengthen the research on the diagnosis and treatment of pancreatic cancer, MDT can try the Internet +MDT mode to improve the efficiency of MDT.

Determination of arterial invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: what is the best diagnostic criterion on CT?

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the diagnostic performance and interobserver variability in the determination of arterial invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and determine the best CT imaging criterion.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 128 patients with PDAC (73 men and 55 women) who underwent preoperative contrast-enhanced CT. Five board-certified radiologists (expert) and four fellows (non-expert]) independently assessed the arterial invasion (celiac, superior mesenteric, splenic, and common hepatic arteries) using a 6-point score: 1, no tumor contact; 2, hazy attenuation ≤ 180°; 3, hazy attenuation > 180°; 4, solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180°; 5, solid soft tissue contact > 180°; and 6, contour irregularity. ROC analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance and determine the best diagnostic criterion for arterial invasion, with pathological or surgical findings as references. Interobserver variability was assessed using Fleiss's ĸ statistics.

RESULTS

Among the 128 patients, 35.2% (n = 45/128) received neoadjuvant treatment (NTx). Solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180° was the best diagnostic criterion for arterial invasion as defined by the Youden Index both in patients who did and did not receive NTx (sensitivity, 100% vs. 100%; specificity, 90% vs. 93%; and AUC, 0.96 vs. 0.98, respectively). Interobserver variability among the non-expert was not inferior to that among the expert (ĸ = 0.61 vs 0.61; p = .39 and ĸ = 0.59 vs 0.51; p < .001 in patients treated with and without NTx, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180° was the best diagnostic criterion for the determination of arterial invasion in PDAC. Considerable interobserver variability was seen among the radiologists.

KEY POINTS

• Solid soft tissue contact ≤ 180° was the best diagnostic criterion for the determination of arterial invasion in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. • Interobserver agreement among non-expert radiologists was almost comparable to that among expert radiologists.

Surgical resection rates after neoadjuvant therapy for localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy is increasingly being used before surgery for localized pancreatic cancer. Given the importance of completing multimodal therapy, the aim of this study was to characterize surgical resection rates after neoadjuvant therapy as well as the reasons for, and long-term prognostic impact of, not undergoing resection.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective trials and high-quality retrospective studies since 2010 was performed to calculate pooled resection rates using a generalized random-effects model for potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer. Median survival times were calculated using random-effects models for patients who did and did not undergo resection.

RESULTS

In 125 studies that met the inclusion criteria, neoadjuvant therapy consisted of chemotherapy (36.8 per cent), chemoradiation (15.2 per cent), or chemotherapy and radiation (48.0 per cent). Among 11 713 patients, the pooled resection rates were 77.4 (95 per cent c.i. 71.3 to 82.5), 60.6 (54.8 to 66.1), and 22.2 (16.7 to 29.0) per cent for potentially resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic cancer respectively. The most common reasons for not undergoing resection were distant progression for resectable and borderline resectable cancers, and local unresectability for locally advanced disease. Among 42 studies with survival data available, achieving surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy was associated with improved survival for patients with potentially resectable (median 38.5 versus 13.3 months), borderline resectable (32.3 versus 13.9 months), and locally advanced (30.0 versus 14.6 months) pancreatic cancer (P < 0.001 for all).

CONCLUSION

Although rates of surgical resection after neoadjuvant therapy vary based on anatomical stage, surgery is associated with improved survival for all patients with localized pancreatic cancer. These pooled resection and survival rates may inform patient-provider decision-making and serve as important benchmarks for future prospective trials.

Long-Term Outcomes of Venous Resections in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Patients: A Nationwide Cohort Study

To investigate whether pancreatic resections (PR) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is associated with worse survival when resection of the superior mesenteric vein/portal vein (SMV/PV) is required.

Background

PR for PDAC with resection of the superior mesenteric vein/portal vein (SMV/PV, PR+V resection) may be associated with inferior overall survival (OS) compared with PR without the need for SMV/PV resection (PR-V). We hypothesized that PR+V results in lower OS compared with PR-V.

Method

Retrospective study using data from the nationwide Danish Pancreatic Cancer Database from 2011 to 2020. Data on patients who underwent PR for PDAC were extracted. A group of PR patients found nonresectable on exploratory laparotomy (EXP) was also included. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards models adjusting for confounders (age, sex, R-resection level, chemotherapy, comorbidities, histology T and N classification, procedure subtype as well as tumor distance to the SMV/PV).

Results

Overall, 2403 patients were identified. Six hundred two underwent exploration only (EXP group), whereas 412 underwent pancreatic resection with (PR+V group) and 1389 (PR-V) without SMV/PV resection. Five-year OS for the PR+V group was lower (20% vs 30%) compared with PR-V, although multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling could not associate PR+V status with OS (Hazard ratio 1.11, P = 0.408).

Conclusion

When correcting for confounders, PR+V was not associated with lower OS compared with PR-V.

Efficacy and safety of FOLFIRINOX as second-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer after gemcitabine-based therapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To undertake a meta-analysis of the treatment effects of different second-line chemotherapy regimens compared with FOLFIRINOX (FOL [folinic acid], F [fluorouracil], IRIN [irinotecan], OX [oxaliplatin]) after failure of gemcitabine-based first-line therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This meta-analysis searched electronic databases, including Embase®, Medline, PubMed® and the Cochrane library, for eligible studies that reported the use of FOLFIRINOX and other drug regimens as second-line chemotherapy after failure of gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. Pooled analyses for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR) and grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TRAEs) were undertaken.

RESULTS

The analysis included six studies with a total of 858 patients. Compared with the three other second-line regimens, FOLFIRINOX had a significantly longer PFS (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.52, 0.89) and OS (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.59, 0.86); and a significantly better ORR (HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.23, 0.80) and DCR (HR 0.71, 95% CI 0.58, 0.88). However, grade 3/4 adverse events were more frequently reported in patients administered FOLFIRINOX compared with the other three regimens.

CONCLUSION

FOLFIRINOX is recommended as a second-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with pancreatic cancer that have failed on gemcitabine-based first-line therapy.Research Registry number: reviewregistry1300.

Prognostic Factors in Patients with Breast Cancer Liver Metastases Undergoing Liver Resection: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Simple Summary

Robust predictive and prognostic tools are needed in the management of breast cancer liver metastases (BCLMs). Until now, surgery has not been the gold standard of treatment of patients with BCLMs. The present manuscript highlights several predictive factors related to the primary tumor and the BCLM that may help to identify candidates for surgery with favorable outcomes in a large cohort of patients.

Abstract

Background: The role of surgical resection of liver metastases in patients with breast cancer liver metastasis (BCLM) remains controversial. A systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factors related to survival after BCLM resection was performed. Methods: An electronic search of relevant publications was performed. Pooled outcome measures were expressed as hazard ratios (HRs), including 95% confidence interval values (95% CIs), and calculated through a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was tested through the I² index. Results: Thirty-five publications reported analyses on prognostic factors and survival. A total of 2782 patients who underwent liver resection for BCLM were included. Positive axillary lymph nodes at breast cancer diagnosis were an unfavorable survival factor (HR 1.74, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.41, I² = 0%). Cumulative predictive factor HRs (multiple liver metastases, size of the metastases, short interval between primary tumor and onset of liver disease) related to the BCLM pattern were 1.32 (95% CI 1.17 to 1.48, I² = 71%) and 1.51 (95% CI 1.15 to 1.98, I² = 76%) for surgical and pathological features (resection margin and presence of extrahepatic disease), respectively. Conclusion: Resection of BCLM may provide a survival benefit for selected patients. For better long-term results, surgical selection should consider both primary tumor and BCLM features such as negative axillary lymph nodes at breast resection, a single hepatic lesion, a time longer than 24 months between breast and hepatic diagnosis, and a realizable R0 liver resection. However, the high heterogeneity among studies suggests the need for an RCT to validate the present findings.

Neoadjuvant Treatment for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Chemotherapy or Chemoradiotherapy?

Worldwide, there is a shifting paradigm from immediate surgery with adjuvant treatment to a neoadjuvant approach for patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC or BRPC). Comparison of neoadjuvant and adjuvant studies is extremely difficult because of a great difference in patient selection. The evidence from randomized studies shows that overall survival by intention-to-treat improves after neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy (various regimens), as compared to immediate surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Radiotherapy appears to play an important role in mediating locoregional effects. Yet, since more effective chemotherapy regimens are currently available, in particular FOLFIRINOX and Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel, these chemotherapy regimens should be investigated in future randomized trials combined with (stereotactic) radiotherapy to further improve outcomes of RPC and BRPC.

Pancreatic cancer in 2021: What you need to know to win

Pancreatic cancer is one of the solid tumors with the worst prognosis. Five-year survival rate is less than 10%. Surgical resection is the only potentially curative treatment, but the tumor is often diagnosed at an advanced stage of the disease and surgery could be performed in a very limited number of patients. Moreover, surgery is still associated with high post-operative morbidity, while other therapies still offer very disappointing results. This article reviews every aspect of pancreatic cancer, focusing on the elements that can improve prognosis. It was written with the aim of describing everything you need to know in 2021 in order to face this difficult challenge.

The Impact of Neoadjuvant Treatment on Survival in Patients Undergoing Pancreatoduodenectomy with Concomitant Portomesenteric Venous Resection: An International Multicenter Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) critically influenced microscopically complete resection (R0) rates and long-term outcomes for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) with portomesenteric vein resection (PVR) from a diverse, world-wide group of high-volume centers.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Limited size studies suggest that NAT improves R0 rates and overall survival compared to upfront surgery in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (R/BR-PDAC) patients.

METHODS

This multicenter study analyzed consecutive patients with R/BR-PDAC who underwent PD with PVR in 23 high-volume centers from 2009 to 2018.

RESULTS

Data from 1192 patients with PD and PVR were collected and analyzed. The median age was 68 [interquartile range (IQR) 60-73] years and 52% were males. Some 186 (15.6%) and 131 (10.9%) patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) alone and neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT), respectively. The R0/R1/R2 rates were 57%, 39.3%, and 3.2% in patients who received NAT compared to 46.6%, 49.9%, and 3.5% in patients who did not, respectively (p=0.004). The 1-, 3-, and 5-year OS in patients receiving NAT was 79%, 41%, and 29%, while for those that did not it was 73%, 29%, and 18%, respectively (p<0.001). Multivariable analysis showed no administration of NAT, high tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, R1/R2 resection, no adjuvant chemotherapy, occurrence of Clavien-Dindo grade 3 or higher postoperative complications within 90 days, preoperative diabetes mellitus, male sex and portal vein involvement were negative independent predictive factors for OS.

CONCLUSION

Patients with PDAC of the pancreatic head expected to undergo venous reconstruction should routinely be considered for NAT.

Landmark Series: Neoadjuvant Treatment in Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is frequently encountered in high-volume centers. It has various definitions among different societies or institutions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this landmark series review, we summarize the critical randomized controlled studies that have defined the neoadjuvant and surgical management of BRPC.

RESULTS

Surgical resection after neoadjuvant treatment is the mainstay of treatment and should involve margin-negative resection with regional lymphadenectomy. Several recently completed randomized controlled clinical trials have defined the role of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for patients with BRPC. The utilization of chemoradiation remains controversial.

CONCLUSIONS

The definition of BRPC goes beyond the anatomic relationship between the tumor and vessels. We need to include biological and conditional dimensions. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgery are associated with improved outcomes of BRPC. Understanding the molecular features of pancreatic cancer should lead to the discovery of novel biomarkers as well as a more personalized approach to guide individualized therapy.