Management of malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction (mGOO) due to pancreatic cancer in the era of EUS-Gastrojejunostomy: an international practice survey and case vignette study by Pancreas 2000 from the European Pancreatic Club

BACKGROUND

Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction (mGOO) has been standardly treated by surgical Gastrojejunostomy (S-GJ) or Endoscopic Stenting (ES). Recently, EUS-Gastrojejunostomy (EUS-GJ) has emerged as an alternative, despite its worldwide diffusion is heterogeneous. The aim of this survey was to assess clinical decision-making around mGOO and to explore current opinions regarding EUS-GJ.

METHODS

An online survey, spread through social networks and EPC newsletter, was created exploring opinions regarding indications, contraindications, benefits/risks, availability of mGOO treatments; 2 case vignettes explored clinical decision-making in different scenarios.

RESULTS

Overall, 290 pancreatologists from 44 countries responded, of whom 35% surgeons and 65% gastroenterologists. The most common treatment for mGOO was ES (86%), followed by laparoscopic GJ (76%). EUS-GJ was accessible to 59% of respondents, with 10% proficient in this technique. Gold-standard treatment for mGOO varied by specialty; 45% of gastroenterologists preferred ES, 20% EUS-GJ, and 10% surgical GJ, while among surgeons, these were 24%, 8%, and 25%, respectively. A higher annual volume of mGOO treated correlated with increased EUS-GJ adoption and reduced surgical advice. For 51%, EUS-GJ will become the primary treatment for mGOO, notably higher among gastroenterologists and high-volume centers. For 14%, EUS-GJ spread will be limited in the future, or used only when ES fails (19%). Life expectancy, disease stage and patient's frailty are the main decision driver in therapeutic choice, whereas future surgical resectability does not contraindicate any treatment for 75%. EUS-GJ's main advantages were its minimally invasive nature and clinical efficacy, offset by its steep learning curve.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey revealed significant differences in the management of mGOO, depending on specialties, local expertise and treatment volume, suggesting the lack of standardized algorithms. Life expectancy and patients' frailty are the main decision drivers. Regarding EUS-GJ, its availability remains suboptimal, with learning curve as the main perceived barrier.

Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) for Suspected Mirizzi Syndrome Type IV as Both a Diagnostic and Bridge-to-Surgery Procedure

Mirizzi syndrome (MS) is a challenging diagnosis due to its similar presentation with other biliary diseases; thus, the role of endoscopy is sometimes unclear, especially in altered anatomy. Radiological examinations may usually suspect it, but deeper examinations could be necessary to confirm it. Endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) certainly has a therapeutic role in cases of jaundice, cholangitis or concurrent choledocolithiasis, although surgery is without doubt the definitive treatment in most of the cases. Therefore, surgeons may have a clearer picture of the condition of the biliary tree with respect to fistulas thanks to ERCP, particularly in patients with a higher grade of MS (type higher than 2 in the Csendes classification). Therefore, a complete removal of biliary stones is sometimes not possible due to size and location, so biliary stenting becomes the only option, even if transitory. Our brief report is a further demonstration of the fundamental role of ERCP in managing MS, even when it has no long-term therapeutic aim but is performed as bridge-to-surgery, especially in cases with a more difficult biliary anatomy due to the type of fistula. Moreover, we truly suggest discussing patients affected with MS in a multidisciplinary board, preferably in tertiary hepatobiliary centers.

Successful multidisciplinary urgent management of life-threatening intraprocedural bleeding after EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy of a pulmonary mass

Video 1Multidisciplinary management of an intraprocedural endobronchial bleeding after EUS-guided transesophageal FNB of a pulmonary mass.

The Role of Endoscopy in the Palliation of Pancreatico-Biliary Cancers: Biliary Drainage, Management of Gastrointestinal Obstruction, and Role in Relief of Oncologic Pain

Therapeutic endoscopy permits many and various treatments for cancer palliation in patients with bilio-pancreatic cancers, enabling different options, supporting patients during their route to oncologic treatments, and trying to improve their quality of life. Therefore, both endoscopic and endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided techniques are performed in this scenario. We performed a literature review focusing on the role of endoscopy in the palliation of those advanced pancreatic and biliary cancers developing malignant biliary obstruction (MBO), gastric outlet obstruction (GOO), and pain unresponsive to medical therapies. Therefore, we explored and focused on the clinical outcomes of endoscopic procedures in this scenario. In fact, the endoscopic treatment is based on achieving biliary drainage in the case of MBO through endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) or EUS-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD), while GOO is endoscopically treated through the deployment of an enteral stent or the creation of EUS-guided gastro-entero-anastomosis (EUS-GEA). Furthermore, untreatable chronic abdominal pain is a major issue in patients unresponsive to high doses of painkillers, so EUS-guided celiac plexus neurolysis (CPN) or celiac ganglia neurolysis (CGN) helps to reduce dosage and have better pain control. Therefore, therapeutic endoscopy in the palliative setting is an effective and safe approach for managing most of the clinical manifestations of advanced biliopancreatic tumors.

A rare case of pedunculated ampulloma: EUS view and resection

Video 1Video showing a rare case of pedunculated ampulloma: imaging evaluation and resection technique.

Complete intraperitoneal maldeployment of a lumen-apposing metal stent during EUS-guided gastroenteroanastomosis for malignant gastric outlet obstruction: rescue retrieval with peritoneoscopy through natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery

Video 1Case showing a complete intraperitoneal maldeployment of a lumen-apposing metal stent during EUS-guided gastro-entero-anastomosis for malignant gastric outlet obstruction, which was rescued through a retrieval with peritoneoscopy through natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery.

A Systematic Review of Endoscopic Treatments for Concomitant Malignant Biliary Obstruction and Malignant Gastric Outlet Obstruction and the Outstanding Role of Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Therapies

BACKGROUND

The treatments for cancer palliation in patients with concomitant malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) and gastric outlet obstruction (MGOO) are still under investigation due to the lack of evidence available in the medical literature. We performed a systematic search and critical review to investigate efficacy and safety among patients with MBO and MGOO undergoing both endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) and MGOO endoscopic treatment.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. EUS-BD included both transduodenal and transgastric techniques. Treatment of MGOO included duodenal stenting or EUS-GEA (gastroenteroanastomosis). Outcomes of interest were technical success, clinical success, and rate of adverse events (AEs) in patients undergoing double treatment in the same session or within one week.

RESULTS

11 studies were included in the systematic review for a total number of 337 patients, 150 of whom had concurrent MBO and MGOO treatment, fulfilling the time criteria. MGOO was treated by duodenal stenting (self-expandable metal stents) in 10 studies, and in one study by EUS-GEA. EUS-BD had a mean technical success of 96.4% (CI 95%, 92.18-98.99) and a mean clinical success of 84.96% (CI 95%, 67.99-96.26). The average frequency of AEs for EUS-BD was 28.73% (CI 95%, 9.12-48.33). Clinical success for duodenal stenting was 90% vs. 100% for EUS-GEA.

CONCLUSIONS

EUS-BD could become the preferred drainage in the case of double endoscopic treatment of concomitant MBO and MGOO in the near future, with the promising EUS-GEA becoming a valid option for MGOO treatment in these patients.

Hepatocellular carcinoma recurrence after direct-acting antiviral therapy: an individual patient data meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The benefit of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) against HCV following successful treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) remains controversial. This meta-analysis of individual patient data assessed HCC recurrence risk following DAA administration.

DESIGN

We pooled the data of 977 consecutive patients from 21 studies of HCV-related cirrhosis and HCC, who achieved complete radiological response after surgical/locoregional treatments and received DAAs (DAA group). Recurrence or death risk was expressed as HCC recurrence or death per 100 person-years (100PY). Propensity score-matched patients from the ITA.LI.CA. cohort (n=328) served as DAA-unexposed controls (no-DAA group). Risk factors for HCC recurrence were identified using random-effects Poisson.

RESULTS

Recurrence rate and death risk per 100PY in DAA-treated patients were 20 (95% CI 13.9 to 29.8, I²=74.6%) and 5.7 (2.5 to 15.3, I²=54.3), respectively. Predictive factors for recurrence were alpha-fetoprotein logarithm (relative risk (RR)=1.11, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.19; p=0.01, per 1 log of ng/mL), HCC recurrence history pre-DAA initiation (RR=1.11, 95% CI 1.07 to 1.16; p<0.001), performance status (2 vs 0, RR=4.35, 95% CI 1.54 to 11.11; 2 vs 1, RR=3.7, 95% CI 1.3 to 11.11; p=0.01) and tumour burden pre-HCC treatment (multifocal vs solitary nodule, RR=1.75, 95% CI 1.25 to 2.43; p<0.001). No significant difference was observed in RR between the DAA-exposed and DAA-unexposed groups in propensity score-matched patients (RR=0.64, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.1; p=0.1).

CONCLUSION

Effects of DAA exposure on HCC recurrence risk remain inconclusive. Active clinical and radiological follow-up of patients with HCC after HCV eradication with DAA is justified.

First-Line Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor-Based Sequential Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Rationale for Future Trials

INTRODUCTION

Atezolizumab (ATEZO) plus bevacizumab (BEVA) represents the new standard of care for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). However, the choice of the second-line treatment after the failure of immunotherapy-based first-line remains elusive. Taking into account the weaknesses of the available evidence, we developed a simulation model based on available phase III randomized clinical trials (RCTs) to identify optimal risk/benefit sequential strategies.

METHODS

A Markov model was built to estimate the overall survival (OS) of sequential first- and second-line systemic treatments. Sequences starting with first-line ATEZO plus BEVA followed by 5 second-line treatments (sorafenib [SORA], lenvatinib [LENVA], regorafenib, cabozantinib, and ramucirumab) were compared. The probability of transition between states (initial treatment, cancer progression, and death) was derived from RCTs. Life-year gained (LYG) was the main outcome. Rates of severe adverse events (SAEs) (≥ grade 3) were calculated. The incremental safety-effectiveness ratio (ISER) was calculated as the difference in probability of SAEs divided by LYG between the 2 most effective sequences.

RESULTS

ATEZO plus BEVA followed by LENVA (median OS, 24 months) or SORA (median OS, 23 months) was the most effective sequence, producing a LYG of 0.50 and 0.42 year, respectively. ATEZO plus BEVA followed by SORA was the safest sequence (SAEs 63%). At a willingness-to-risk threshold of 10% of SAEs for LYG, ATEZO plus BEVA followed by second-line SORA was favored in 72% of cases, while at a threshold of 30% of SAEs for LYG, ATEZO plus BEVA followed by second-line LENVA was favored in 69% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Our simulation model provides a strong rationale to support ongoing trials evaluating second-line tyrosine-kinase inhibitors after first-line ATEZO plus BEVA. Future evidence from ongoing RCTs and prospective real-world studies are needed to prove the net health benefit of sequential treatment options for advanced HCC.

Biliopancreatic Endoscopy in Altered Anatomy

Background and Objectives: Anatomical post-surgical alterations of the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract have always been challenging for performing diagnostic and therapeutic endoscopy, especially when biliopancreatic diseases are involved. Esophagectomy, gastrectomy with various reconstructions and pancreaticoduodenectomy are among the most common surgeries causing upper GI tract alterations. Technological improvements and new methods have increased the endoscopic success rate in these patients, and the literature has been rapidly increasing over the past few years. The aim of this systematic review is to identify evidence on the available biliopancreatic endoscopic techniques performed in the altered post-surgical anatomy of upper GI tract. Materials and Methods: We performed a systematic search of PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and SCOPUS databases. Study-level variables extracted were the last name of the first author, publication year, study design, number of patients, type of post-surgical anatomical alteration, endoscopic technique, success rate and endoscopic-related adverse events. Results: Our primary search identified 221 titles, which was expanded with studies after the citation search. The final full-text review process identified 52 articles (31 retrospective studies, 8 prospective studies and 13 case reports). We found several different techniques developed over the years for biliopancreatic diseases in altered anatomy, in order to perform both endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). They included enteroscopy-assisted ERCP (double and single balloon enteroscopy-ERCP, spiral enteroscopy-ERCP) laparoscopic assisted ERCP, EUS-Directed transgastric ERCP, EUS-directed transgastric intervention, gastric access temporary for endoscopy, and percutaneous assisted trans prosthetic endoscopic therapy. The success rate was high (most of the techniques showed a success rate over 90%) and a low rate of adverse events were reported. Conclusions: We suggest the considerationof the novel techniques when approaching patients with altered anatomy who require biliopancreatic endoscopy, focusing on the surgery type, success rate and adverse events reported in the literature.

Endoscopic Treatment of Iatrogenic Perforation of Sigmoid Diverticulum: A Case Report of Multidisciplinary Management

Iatrogenic perforations are severe complications of gastrointestinal endoscopy; therefore, their management should be adequately planned. A 77-year-old man with a history of diverticulosis underwent a colonoscopy for anemia. During the procedure, an iatrogenic perforation occurred suddenly in the sigmoid colon, near a severe angle among the numerous diverticula. Through-the- scope clips were immediately applied to treat it and close mucosal edges. Laboratory tests showed increased inflammation and infection, and although there were no complaints of abdominal pain, the patient had an extremely distended abdomen. A multidisciplinary board began management based on a conservative approach. Pneumoperitoneum was treated with computed tomography-assisted drainage. After 72 hours, his intestinal canalization and laboratory tests were normal. Though this adverse event is rare, a multidisciplinary board should be promptly gathered upon occurrence, even if the patient appears clinically stable, to consider a conservative approach and avoid surgical treatment.

Systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: the present and the future

Hepatocellular carcinoma is diagnosed in more than half of all cases at unresectable stage when no potentially curative treatments are feasible. Since 2008, sorafenib had represented the only effective first line systemic therapy over the last decade until the approval of lenvatinib, who showed to be non-inferior to sorafenib. Recently, for the first time, a combination of immunotherapy and antiangiogenic drug, atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, was associated with a significantly longer overall survival and progression free survival compared to sorafenib, becoming the new best performing first-line approach for unresectable HCC. After several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that have attempted to find an effective second-line therapy, regorafenib, cabozantinib, ramucirumab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab represent approved treatments for patients who failed first-line treatment. However, inclusion criteria of second-line RCTs are quite heterogeneous and no direct comparisons exist among these agents. Exciting opportunities have been found either in the combination or in the sequencing of these agents, but the optimal therapeutic strategy for these patients remains elusive. Moreover, the coexistence of cirrhosis and the competing risk of liver decompensation increase the complexity of the assessment of the net health benefit of the available therapeutic approaches. The aim of this review is to summarize the evidence on systemic treatments for unresectable HCC and to explore the future perspectives on this topic.

Modeling sequential systemic therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma in the era of immunotherapy: What comes next?

324

Background: Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab represents the new best performing first-line approach for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (u-HCC). However, the best sequential strategy after every first-line failure (for progression or intolerance) remains elusive, and options for retreating patients failing Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab with multi-kinase inhibitors (MKI) or immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) are yet undefined. Methods: We developed a Markov model to analyze simulated-Overall Survival (s-OS) of second-line ICIs or MKIs after first-line Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab over a lifetime horizon. For first-line therapy, PFS of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab was extracted from Imbrave 150 trial and it was used as endpoint since it is not influenced by post-progression survival. For second-line retreatment, pooled OS of MKIs (Regorafenib and Cabozantinib), or ICIs (Nivolumab and Pembrolizumab) were adopted. Survival estimates for sequential settings considered the proportion of patients who did not receive second-line therapy due to death during first-line therapy. Individual patient survival data were extracted from PFS and OS Kaplan-Meier curves of RESORCE trial for Regorafenib, CELESTIAL trial for Cabozantinib, CheckMate-040 for Nivolumab and Keynote-240 for Pembrolizumab. Each reconstructed survival curve was inspected for accuracy and was compared with originally published curves. Results: First-line Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by second-line ICIs turned on from the model as the best sequential strategy (median s-OS 24 months; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 23-26 months) and extends survival when compared Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by MKIs (median s-OS 20 months; 95% CI 19-21 months). Conclusions: To our knowledge and given the absence of adequately designed sequential RCTs, this is the first model to date which suggests, with a proper methodological approach, an accurate estimate of outcome of patients with u-HCC treated by sequential systemic therapies. In patients with u-HCC failing first-line treatment, modelling estimates of s-OS for each retreatment strategies may assist in choosing the most promising sequences in order to plan appropriate RCTs.

SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with a normal or abnormal liver

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2), a novel coronavirus causing coronavirus disease 19 (COVID-19), with an estimated 22 million people infected worldwide so far although involving primarily the respiratory tract, has a remarkable tropism for the liver and the biliary tract. Patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection and no antecedent liver disease may display evidence of cytolytic liver damage, proportional to the severity of COVID-19 but rarely of clinical significance. The mechanism of hepatocellular injury is unclear and possibly multifactorial. The clinical impact of SARS-CoV-2 infection in patients with underlying chronic liver disease, a cohort whose global size is difficult to estimate, has been assessed appropriately only recently and data are still evolving. Patients with cirrhosis are at higher risk of developing severe COVID-19 and worse liver-related outcomes as compared to those with non-cirrhotic liver disease. OLT patients have an intermediate risk. Specific interventions in order to reduce the risk of transmission of infection among this high-risk population have been outlined by international societies, together with recommendations for modified treatment and follow-up regimens during the COVID-19 pandemic. When a vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 becomes available, patients with fibrotic liver disease and those with OLT should be considered as prime targets for prophylaxis of COVID-19, as all other highly susceptible subjects.

Optimizing Sequential Systemic Therapies for Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma: A Decision Analysis

Background: An optimal sequential systemic therapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) has not been discovered. We developed a decision model based on available clinical trials to identify an optimal risk/benefit strategy for sequences of novel systemic agents. Methods: A Markov model was built to simulate overall survival (OS) among patients with advanced HCC. Three first-line (single-agent Sorafenib or Lenvatinib, and combination of Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab) followed by five second-line treatments (Regorafenib, Cabozantinib, Ramucirumab, Nivolumab, Pembrolizumab) were compared in fifteen sequential strategies. The likelihood of transition between states (initial treatment, cancer progression, death) was derived from clinical trials. Life-year gained (LYG) was the main outcome. Rates of severe adverse events (SAEs) (≥grade 3) were calculated. The innovative measure, called incremental safety-effectiveness ratio (ISER), of the two best sequential treatments was calculated as the difference in probability of SAEs divided by LYG. Results: Lenvatinib followed by Nivolumab (median OS, 27 months) was the most effective sequence, producing a LYG of 0.75, while Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab followed by Nivolumab was the safest sequence (SAEs 40%). Accordingly, the net health benefit assessed by ISER favored Lenvatinib followed by Nivolumab, compared to Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab, followed by Nivolumab in 52% of cases. Conclusion: Further sequential clinical trials or large-scale real-world studies may prove useful to evaluate the net health benefit of the best sequential treatment for advanced HCC.

Outcomes of hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib: a meta-analysis of Phase III trials

Aim: To benchmark overall survival (OS) and time to radiological progression (TTP) of patients enrolled in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma using individual participant survival data, and to meta-analyze prognostic factors for OS and TTP. Methods: RCTs were identified through literature search until December 2018. Individual participant survival was reconstructed with an algorithm from published Kaplan-Meier curves. Results: Ten RCTs were included. Median OS was 10.0 months (95% CI: 9.6-10.5), and median TTP was 4.1 months (95% CI: 3.8-4.3). Multivariable analyses showed HCV positivity, absence of macrovascular invasion and extra-hepatic disease as predictors of longer OS. Conclusion: We provided a benchmark for future studies on sorafenib. The present results can be used in the decision making for the early shift to second-line strategy.