Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy Versus Upfront Surgery for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Long-Term Results of the Dutch Randomized PREOPANC Trial

Current State and Future Directions of Radiation Therapy for Pancreas Adenocarcinoma

Studies suggest select patients from across the pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) disease spectrum may benefit from adding radiation therapy (RT) to multi-modality care. In resectable PDAC, there is an evolving role for neoadjuvant RT with adjuvant RT reserved for patients with increased recurrence risk. In borderline resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant chemoradiation likely improves R0 resection rates and in unresectable PDAC, definitive RT may prolong survival for some patients. Recent developments in RT delivery are promising but additional studies are needed to determine the benefit of these technologies and to optimize the role of RT in multi-modality care.

Targeted therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Mechanisms and clinical study

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive and lethal malignancy with a high rate of recurrence and a dismal 5-year survival rate. Contributing to the poor prognosis of PDAC is the lack of early detection, a complex network of signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms, a dense and desmoplastic stroma, and an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. A recent shift toward a neoadjuvant approach to treating PDAC has been sparked by the numerous benefits neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has to offer compared with upfront surgery. However, certain aspects of NAT against PDAC, including the optimal regimen, the use of radiotherapy, and the selection of patients that would benefit from NAT, have yet to be fully elucidated. This review describes the major signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms involved in PDAC initiation and progression in addition to the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment of PDAC. We then review current guidelines, ongoing research, and future research directions on the use of NAT based on randomized clinical trials and other studies. Finally, the current use of and research regarding targeted therapy for PDAC are examined. This review bridges the molecular understanding of PDAC with its clinical significance, development of novel therapies, and shifting directions in treatment paradigm.

Utility of endoscopic ultrasound for assessment of locoregional recurrence of pancreatic adenocarcinoma after surgical resection

Background and study aims  Up to 80 % of patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma develop locoregional recurrence after primary resection. However, the detection of recurrent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (RPDAC) after pancreatic surgery can be challenging because of difficulty distinguishing locoregional recurrence from normal postoperative or post-radiation changes. We sought to evaluate the utility of endoscopic ultrasound (EUS), in detecting pancreatic adenocarcinoma recurrence after surgical resection and its impact on the clinical management of patients. Patients and methods  This was a retrospective study of all pancreatic cancer patients who underwent EUS post-resection at two tertiary care centers between January 2004 and June 2019. Results  Sixty-seven patients were identified. Of these, 57 (85 %) were diagnosed with RPDAC, resulting in change in clinical management of 46 (72 %) patients. EUS identified masses not seen on computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, or positron emission tomography in seven (14 %). Conclusions  EUS is useful in detecting RPDAC after pancreatic surgery and can lead to significant impact on clinical management.

Outcome of metal vs plastic stents for biliary obstruction in patients with pancreatic carcinoma undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative biliary drainage (PBT) may be warranted in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic carcinoma before neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) to relieve obstructive jaundice. However, it is unclear if the use of self-expanding metal stents (SEMS) has any benefit over plastic stents in this setting.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases from inception to February 11, 2022 to identify studies comparing SEMS and plastic stents for PBT in patients with pancreatic carcinoma undergoing NAT. Random effect models were used to determine pooled rates of recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) and/or need for reintervention, stent-related complications and surgical outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies (474 patients; metal group-37.1%) were included. Pooled risk ratio of RBO and/or need for reintervention was lower in the metal group (RR, 0.23 [95% CI: 0.11-0.45, I2  = 60%]). Pooled risks of stent occlusion (RR, 0.43 [95% CI: 0.24-0.80, I2  = 45%]) and stent-related cholangitis (RR, 0.37 [95% CI: 0.17-0.78, I2  = 1%]) were lower in the metal group. However, risks of stent-related cholecystitis (RR, 1.51 [95% CI: 0.36-6.41, I2  = 0%]) and pancreatitis (RR, 1.52 [95% CI: 0.07-31.84, I2  = 66%]) were higher in the metal group. The metal group was also associated with a reduced risk of delay in NAT (RR, 0.38 [95% CI: 0.18-0.80, I2  = 14%]). Pooled risk ratio of R0 resection and postoperative complications was equal amongst both groups.

CONCLUSION

Metal stents are associated with reduced risk of RBO and/or need for reintervention, reduced risk of stent occlusion and cholangitis as compared to plastic stents in patients with pancreatic carcinoma undergoing NAT.

Clinical Impact of Preoperative Biliary Drainage in Patients with Ductal Adenocarcinoma of the Pancreatic Head

Our aim was to study the association between preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) and morbidity following cephalic pancreaticoduodenectomy (CPD) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) and its prognostic impact, which is still controversial in the literature. A retrospective study was conducted, which included 128 patients who underwent CPD for PDAC, divided into two groups: those who underwent PBD (group 1) and those who did not undergo this procedure (group 2). Group 1 was subdivided according to the drainage route: endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP), group 1.1, and percutaneous transhepatic cholangiography (PTC), group 1.2. 34.4% of patients underwent PBD, and 47.7% developed PBD-related complications, with 37% in group 1.1 and 64.7% in group 1.2 (p = 0.074). There was a significant difference between group 1 and 2 regarding bacterial colonization of the bile (45.5% vs. 3.6%, p < 0.001), but no difference was found in the colonization by multidrug-resistant bacteria, the development of Clavien–Dindo ≥ III complications, clinically relevant pancreatic fistula and delayed gastric emptying (DGE), intra-abdominal abscess, hemorrhage, superficial surgical site infection (SSI), and readmission. Between groups 1.1 and 1.2, there was a significant difference in clinically relevant DGE (44.4% vs. 5.9%, p = 0.014) and Clavien–Dindo ≥ III complications (59.3% vs. 88.2%, p = 0.040). There were no significant differences in median overall survival and disease-free survival (DFS) between groups 1 and 2. Groups 1.1 and 1.2 had a significant difference in DFS (10 vs. 5 months, p = 0.017). In this group of patients, PBD was associated with increased bacterial colonization of the bile, without a significant increase in postoperative complications or influence in survival. ERCP seems to contribute to the development of clinically significant DGE. Patients undergoing PTC appear to have an early recurrence.

Refining the Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer From Big Data to Improved Individual Survival

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most lethal cancers worldwide, most notably in Europe and North America. Great strides have been made in combining the most effective conventional therapies to improve survival at least in the short and medium term. The start of treatment can only be made once a diagnosis is made, which at this point, the tumor volume is already very high in the primary cancer and systemically. If caught at the earliest opportunity (in circa 20% patients) surgical resection of the primary followed by combination chemotherapy can achieve 5-year overall survival rates of 30%-50%. A delay in detection of even a few months after symptom onset will result in the tumor having only borderline resectabilty (in 20%-30% of patients), in which case the best survival is achieved by using short-course chemotherapy before tumor resection as well as adjuvant chemotherapy. Once metastases become visible (in 40%-60% of patients), cure is not possible, palliative cytotoxics only being able to prolong life by few months. Even in apparently successful therapy in resected and borderline resectable patients, the recurrence rate is very high. Considerable efforts to understand the nature of pancreatic cancer through large-scale genomics, transcriptomics, and digital profiling, combined with functional preclinical models, using genetically engineered mouse models and patient derived organoids, have identified the critical role of the tumor microenvironment in determining the nature of chemo- and immuno-resistance. This functional understanding has powered fresh and exciting approaches for the treatment of this cancer.

The Current Role of Radiation in Pancreatic Cancer and Future Directions

Survival outcomes for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains poor. Multimodality therapeutic regimens are critical to maximizing survival outcomes for these patients, which includes the use of systemic therapy, surgery, and radiation. In this review, the evolution of radiation techniques are discussed with a focus on modern techniques such as intensity modulated radiation and stereotactic body radiation therapy. However, the current role of radiation within the most common clinical scenarios for pancreatic cancer in the neoadjuvant, definitive, and adjuvant settings continues to be highly debated. The role of radiation in these settings is reviewed in the context of historical and modern clinical studies. In addition, emerging concepts including dose-escalated radiation, magnetic resonance-guided radiation therapy, and particle therapy are discussed to promote an understanding of how such concepts may change the role of radiation in the future.

Immunonutrition and prehabilitation in pancreatic cancer surgery: A new concept in the era of ERAS® and neoadjuvant treatment

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is an aggressive disease, with a growing incidence, and a poor prognosis. Neoadjuvant treatments in PC are highly recommended in borderline resectable and recently in upfront resectable PC. PC is characterized by exocrine insufficiency and nutritional imbalance, leading to malnutrition/sarcopenia. The concept of malnutrition in PC is multifaceted, as the cancer-related alterations create an interplay with adverse effects of anticancer treatments. All these critical factors have a negative impact on the postoperative and oncological outcomes. A series of actions and programs can be implemented to improve resectable and borderline resectable PC in terms of postoperative complications, oncological outcomes and patients' quality of life. A timely nutritional evaluation and the implementation of appropriate evidence-based nutritional interventions in onco-surgical patients should be considered of importance to improve preoperative physical fitness. Unfortunately, nutritional care and its optimization are often neglected in real-world clinical practice. Currently available studies and ERAS® guidelines mostly support the use of pre- or perioperative medical nutrition, including immunonutrition, in order to decrease the rate of postoperative infections and length of hospital stay. Further data also suggest that medical nutrition should be considered proactively in PC patients, to possibly prevent severe malnutrition and its consequences on disease and treatment outcomes. This narrative review summarizes the most recent data related to the role of prehabilitation, ERAS® program, medical nutrition, and the timing of intervention on clinical outcomes of upfront resectable and borderline PC, and their potential implementation within the timeframe of neoadjuvant treatments.

The Impact of Additional Para-aortic Dissection During Pancreaticoduodenectomy for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

The short-term outcome and long-term survival of pancreaticoduodenectomy with additional para-aortic dissection (PAD) for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer remain obscure.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent radical pancreaticoduodenectomy for resectable pancreatic cancer in a single high-volume center during a 7-year period were included retrospectively. Both short- and long-term effects of PAD were compared between the PAD group and the no PAD group. Then, the PAD group was divided into the non-metastatic para-aortic lymph node (PALN-) group and the metastatic PALN (PALN+) group to further analyze the prognosis of PALN+.

RESULTS

Of the 909 included patients, 280 (30.8%) underwent PAD during pancreaticoduodenectomy. The PAD group had a higher rate of intra-abdominal infection compared with the no PAD group (28.6% vs. 20.7%, P = 0.009) but no differences were found in the incidence of other complications. The overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were also comparable between the two groups. Subgroup analysis showed that patients with PALN+ had a worse OS than patients in the PALN- group (median of 14 vs. 20 months, P = 0.048). Multivariate Cox regression analysis further revealed that PALN+ was an independent adverse predictor of OS (hazard ratio: 1.70, P = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that the addition of PAD during pancreaticoduodenectomy does not improve the prognosis of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer and may lead to an increased risk of infection. However, the accurate preoperative assessment and appropriate treatment strategy for patients with PALN+ need further investigation due to the poor prognosis.

Comparison the efficacy and safety of different neoadjuvant regimens for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

To date, the optimal recommended specific neoadjuvant regimens for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC or BRPC) remain an unanswered issue.

METHODS

We systematically searched the electronic databases to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different neoadjuvant therapy strategies for RPC or BRPC. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). Comprehensive analyses and evaluations were performed using the single-arm, paired, and network meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Twelve RCTs involving 1279 patients with RPC or BRPC were enrolled. The paired meta-analysis showed that neoadjuvant therapy improved OS for both RPC (hazard ratio (HR) 0.69, 95% c.i. 0.54 to 0.87) and BRPC (HR 0.60, 0.42 to 0.86) compared with upfront surgery (UP-S). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) also improved OS for both RPC (HR 0.63, 0.47 to 0.85) and BRPC (HR 0.44, 0.27 to 0.71), while neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACR) improved OS only for BRPC (HR 0.68, 0.52 to 0.89) and not for RPC (HR 0.79, 0.54 to 1.16). Network meta-analysis found that NAC was superior to NACR in OS for RPC/BRPC (HR 0.58, 0.37 to 0.90). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on modified fluorouracil/folinic acid/irinotecan/oxaliplatin (NAC-mFFX) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy based on abraxane/gemcitabine (NAC-AG) ranked first and second in OS for RPC/BRPC.

CONCLUSIONS

Both RPC and BRPC could obtain OS benefits from neoadjuvant therapy compared with UP-S, and NAC improved OS both in RPC and BRPC while NACR only improved OS in BRPC. Furthermore, NAC was superior to NACR, and NAC-mFFX and NAC-AG might be recommended sequentially as the best neoadjuvant therapy strategies.

Pancreatoduodenectomy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in duodenal adenocarcinoma

A 51-year-old male patient had four times of massive hematochezia episode three days before arrival. Carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 level was extremely elevated. Computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography-computed tomography identified 5.7 cm sized periampullary duodenal cancer with regional metastatic lymph nodes and vascular invasion to aberrant right hepatic artery, main portal vein, and superior mesenteric vein. Diagnosed as duodenal adenocarcinoma through endoscopic biopsy, 16 times of FOLFIRI (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan) was conducted. The regimen changed to XELOX (capecitabine, oxaliplatine), four times of administration was done, and the CA19-9 level dramatically decreased. The tumor decreased to 2.1 cm. After R0 laparoscopic pylorus preserving pancreatoduodenectomy, no adjuvant therapy was given. No sign of recurrence or metastasis was reported, and the patient reached complete remission after five years. We reported a case where neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced duodenal adenocarcinoma was shown to be effective.

Comprehensive multimodal management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: Current status and progress

Borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) is a complex clinical entity with specific biological features. Criteria for resectability need to be assessed in combination with tumor anatomy and oncology. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) for BRPC patients is associated with additional survival benefits. Research is currently focused on exploring the optimal NAT regimen and more reliable ways of assessing response to NAT. More attention to management standards during NAT, including biliary drainage and nutritional support, is needed. Surgery remains the cornerstone of BRPC treatment and multidisciplinary teams can help to evaluate whether patients are suitable for surgery and provide individualized management during the perioperative period, including NAT responsiveness and the selection of surgical timing.

Surgical outcome of a double versus a single pancreatoduodenectomy per operating day

BACKGROUND

For logistical reasons, some high-volume centers have developed surgical programs wherein 1 surgical team performs 2 pancreatoduodenectomies on a single day. It is unclear whether this practice has a negative impact on surgical outcome.

METHODS

We conuducted a retrospective analysis including all consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies in a single high-volume center (2014-2021). Pancreatoduodenectomies were grouped as the first (pancreatoduodenectomy-1) or second (pancreatoduodenectomy-2) pancreatoduodenectomy on a single day (ie, paired pancreatoduodenectomies) and as pancreatoduodenectomy-3 whenever 1 pancreatoduodenectomy was performed per day (ie, unpaired). Patients undergoing minimally invasive procedures were excluded. The primary outcomes were major morbidity (ie, Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) and mortality.

RESULTS

Among 689 patients, 151 patients had undergone minimally invasive pancreatoduodenectomy, leaving 538 patients after open pancreatoduodenectomy for inclusion. The overall rate of major morbidity was 37.4% (n = 200/538) and in-hospital/30-day mortality 1.7% (n = 9/538). Overall, 136 (25.3%) patients were operated in 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and 402 (74.7%) patients as unpaired pancreatoduodenectomy (pancreatoduodenectomy-3). No differences were found between pancreatoduodenectomy-1 and pancreatoduodenectomy-2 regarding the rates of major morbidity (35.3% vs 26.5%; P = .265) and mortality (1.5% vs 0%; P = .999). Between the 68 pancreatoduodenectomy-1/ pancreatoduodenectomy-2 pairs and the 402 unpaired pancreatoduodenectomies, the rates of major morbidity (30.9% vs 39.6%; P = .071) and mortality (0.7% vs 2.0%; P = .461) did not differ significantly. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, pancreatoduodenectomy-1 was not associated with major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.913 [95% confidence interval 0.515-1.620]; P = .756), whereas pancreatoduodenectomy-2 was associated with less major morbidity (odds ratio = 0.522 [95% confidence interval 0.277-0.983]; P = .045).

CONCLUSION

In a high-volume setting, performing 2 consecutive open pancreatoduodenectomies on a single operating day appears to be safe. This approach may be an option when logistically required.

The Timing of Surgery Following Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy Impacts Local Control for Borderline Resectable or Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

We aimed to evaluate the impact of time from stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) to surgery on treatment outcomes and post-operative complications in patients with borderline resectable or locally advanced pancreatic cancer (BRPC/LAPC). We conducted a single-institutional retrospective analysis of patients with BRPC/LAPC treated from 2016 to 2021 with neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by SBRT and surgical resection. Covariates were stratified by time from SBRT to surgery. A Cox regression model was used to identify variables associated with survival outcomes. In 171 patients with BRPC/LAPC, the median time from SBRT to surgery was 6.4 (range: 2.7-25.3) weeks. Hence, patients were stratified by the timing of surgery: ≥6 and <6 weeks after SBRT. In univariable Cox regression, surgery ≥6 weeks was associated with improved local control (LC, HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.30-0.98; p = 0.042), pathologic node positivity, elevated baseline CA19-9, and inferior LC if of the male sex. In multivariable analysis, surgery ≥6 weeks (p = 0.013; HR 0.46, 95%CI 0.25-0.85), node positivity (p = 0.019; HR 2.09, 95% CI 1.13-3.88), and baseline elevated CA19-9 (p = 0.002; HR 2.73, 95% CI 1.44-5.18) remained independently associated with LC. Clavien-Dindo Grade ≥3B complications occurred in 4/63 (6.3%) vs. 5/99 (5.5%) patients undergoing surgery <6 weeks and ≥6 weeks after SBRT (p = 0.7). In summary, the timing of surgery ≥6 weeks after SBRT was associated with improved local control and low post-operative complication rates, irrespective of the surgical timing. Further investigation of the influence of surgical timing following radiotherapy is warranted.

CA19-9 Response to First-Line Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and Second-Line Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Operable Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

Response to second-line (2L) neoadjuvant therapy for operable pancreatic cancer (PC) is understudied. This study examined carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) response to first-line (1L) and 2L chemotherapy.

METHODS

The study identified patients with operable PC and elevated CA19-9 (≥ 35 U/mL with total bilirubin < 2 mg/dL) who received 1L FOLFIRINOX (FFX). The patients were restaged after 2 months and based on response, received additional FFX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP) as part of total neoadjuvant therapy. Response was defined as a decrease in tumor size on computed tomography (CT) imaging or a decline in CA19-9 of 50% or more and preserved performance status.

RESULTS

For operable PC with an elevated CA19-9, 108 patients received 1L FFX. After 2 months of chemotherapy, the decision was made to continue FFX (FFX ≥ FFX) for 76 (70%) of the 108 patients and switch to GnP (FFX ≥ GnP)) for 32 (30%) of the patients. Of the 32 FFX ≥ GnP patients, 27 had no evidence of radiographic or biochemical (CA19-9) response to 1L FFX. Of these 27 patients, 26 (96%) demonstrated a response to 2L GnP. After 4 months of chemotherapy, 62 (82%) of the 76 FFX ≥ FFX patients had a CA19-9 response compared with 31 (97%) of the 32 FFX ≥ GnP patients (p = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Lack of biochemical response to 2 months of 1L FFX may identify a subgroup of patients with a very high rate of response to 2L GnP, emphasizing the importance of assessing treatment response at 2-month intervals.

Clinical Implications of FDG-PET in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical significance of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Among 285 consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2015 and 2021, 86 who underwent preoperative ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography after completion of neoadjuvant treatment were reviewed. Among preoperative factors, including post-treatment maximum standardized uptake value, predictors of early recurrence and poor prognosis were identified using multivariate analysis for decision making in surgery.

RESULTS

Nineteen (22%) patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma demonstrated high maximum standardized uptake (≥ 4.5). High post-treatment maximum standardized uptake (≥ 4.5) predicted early recurrence within 6 months after surgery and correlated with shorter recurrence-free survival. Elevated post-treatment CA19-9 level (> 37 U/ml) and maximum standardized uptake ≥ 4.5 were independent prognostic factors. Post-treatment, a high maximum standardized uptake value indicated a poorer prognosis than a low maximum standardized uptake value in both patients with elevated CA19-9 and normal CA19-9 levels. The median overall survival in patients with elevated post-treatment CA19-9 and high maximum standardized uptake was only 17 months; 67% experienced early recurrence. Dynamic changes in maximum standardized uptake during neoadjuvant therapy were correlated with pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy, but not with radiological response or change in CA19-9 level.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-treatment assessment using maximum standardized uptake value is useful for stratifying patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who will benefit from surgery. Instead of subsequent curative resection, additional neoadjuvant therapy should be considered in patients with a persistently high maximum standardized uptake value.

Immediate surgery compared with short-course neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine, FOLFIRINOX, or chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (ESPAC5): a four-arm, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have relatively low resection rates and poor survival despite the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to establish the feasibility and efficacy of three different types of short-course neoadjuvant therapy compared with immediate surgery.

METHODS

ESPAC5 (formerly known as ESPAC-5f) was a multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial done in 16 pancreatic centres in two countries (UK and Germany). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, biopsy proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic head, and were staged as having a borderline resectable tumour by contrast-enhanced CT criteria following central review. Participants were randomly assigned by means of minimisation to one of four groups: immediate surgery; neoadjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, and oral capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice a day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for two cycles); neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, folinic acid given according to local practice, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus injection on days 1 and 15 followed by 2400 mg/m2 46 h intravenous infusion given on days 1 and 15, repeated every 2 weeks for four cycles); or neoadjuvant capecitabine-based chemoradiation (total dose 50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions over 5·5 weeks [1·8 Gy per fraction, Monday to Friday] with capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily [Monday to Friday] throughout radiotherapy). Patients underwent restaging contrast-enhanced CT at 4-6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgical exploration if the tumour was still at least borderline resectable. All patients who had their tumour resected received adjuvant therapy at the oncologist's discretion. Primary endpoints were recruitment rate and resection rate. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 89500674, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 3, 2014, and Dec 20, 2018, from 478 patients screened, 90 were randomly assigned to a group (33 to immediate surgery, 20 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 20 to FOLFIRINOX, and 17 to capecitabine-based chemoradiation); four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis (one in the capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy withdrew consent before starting therapy and three [two in the immediate surgery group and one in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group] were found to be ineligible after randomisation). 44 (80%) of 55 patients completed neoadjuvant therapy. The recruitment rate was 25·92 patients per year from 16 sites; 21 (68%) of 31 patients in the immediate surgery and 30 (55%) of 55 patients in the combined neoadjuvant therapy groups underwent resection (p=0·33). R0 resection was achieved in three (14%) of 21 patients in the immediate surgery group and seven (23%) of 30 in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined (p=0·49). Surgical complications were observed in 29 (43%) of 68 patients who underwent surgery; no patients died within 30 days. 46 (84%) of 55 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were available for restaging. Six (13%) of 46 had a partial response. Median follow-up time was 12·2 months (95% CI 12·0-12·4). 1-year overall survival was 39% (95% CI 24-61) for immediate surgery, 78% (60-100) for gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 84% (70-100) for FOLFIRINOX, and 60% (37-97) for capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (p=0·0028). 1-year disease-free survival from surgery was 33% (95% CI 19-58) for immediate surgery and 59% (46-74) for the combined neoadjuvant therapies (hazard ratio 0·53 [95% CI 0·28-0·98], p=0·016). Three patients reported local disease recurrence (two in the immediate surgery group and one in the FOLFIRINOX group). 78 (91%) patients were included in the safety set and assessed for toxicity events. 19 (24%) of 78 patients reported a grade 3 or worse adverse event (two [7%] of 28 patients in the immediate surgery group and 17 [34%] of 50 patients in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined), the most common of which were neutropenia, infection, and hyperglycaemia.

INTERPRETATION

Recruitment was challenging. There was no significant difference in resection rates between patients who underwent immediate surgery and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Short-course (8 week) neoadjuvant therapy had a significant survival benefit compared with immediate surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with either gemcitabine plus capecitabine or FOLFIRINOX had the best survival compared with immediate surgery. These findings support the use of short-course neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Does neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer improve overall survival? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy may improve overall survival (OS) in 'borderline' resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC). Whether the results are the same in upfront RPC is unknown.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

To evaluate the association of neoadjuvant treatment and survival outcomes in RPC, a systematic literature review was carried out including prospective randomized trials of neoadjuvant treatment versus upfront surgery. Articles indexed in PubMed, Embase and Scopus were evaluated. Data regarding systemic treatment regimens, R0 resection rates, disease-free survival (DFS) and OS were extracted. The outcomes were compared using a random-effects model. The index I² and the graphs of funnel plot were used for the interpretation of the data.

RESULTS

Of 3229 abstracts, 6 randomized controlled trials were considered eligible with a combined sample size of 805 RPC patients. Among the trials, PACT-15, PREP-02/JSAP-05 and updated long-term results from PREOPANC and NEONAX trials were included. Combining the studies with meta-analysis, we could see that neoadjuvant treatment in RPC does not improve DFS [hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 (0.46-1.09)] or OS [HR 0.76 (0.52-1.11)], without significant heterogeneity. Interestingly, R0 rates improved ∼20% with the neoadjuvant approach [HR 1.2 (1.04-1.37)]. It is important to note that most studies evaluated gemcitabine-based regimens in the neoadjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or chemoradiation does not improve DFS or OS in RPC compared to upfront surgery followed by adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant treatment improves R0 rates by ∼20%. Randomized ongoing trials are eagerly awaited with more active combined regimens including modified FOLFIRINOX.

Combination, Modulation and Interplay of Modern Radiotherapy with the Tumor Microenvironment and Targeted Therapies in Pancreatic Cancer: Which Candidates to Boost Radiotherapy?

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma cancer (PDAC) is a highly diverse disease with low tumor immunogenicity. PDAC is also one of the deadliest solid tumor and will remain a common cause of cancer death in the future. Treatment options are limited, and tumors frequently develop resistance to current treatment modalities. Since PDAC patients do not respond well to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), novel methods for overcoming resistance are being explored. Compared to other solid tumors, the PDAC's tumor microenvironment (TME) is unique and complex and prevents systemic agents from effectively penetrating and killing tumor cells. Radiotherapy (RT) has the potential to modulate the TME (e.g., by exposing tumor-specific antigens, recruiting, and infiltrating immune cells) and, therefore, enhance the effectiveness of targeted systemic therapies. Interestingly, combining ICI with RT and/or chemotherapy has yielded promising preclinical results which were not successful when translated into clinical trials. In this context, current standards of care need to be challenged and transformed with modern treatment techniques and novel therapeutic combinations. One way to reconcile these findings is to abandon the concept that the TME is a well-compartmented population with spatial, temporal, physical, and chemical elements acting independently. This review will focus on the most interesting advancements of RT and describe the main components of the TME and their known modulation after RT in PDAC. Furthermore, we will provide a summary of current clinical data for combinations of RT/targeted therapy (tRT) and give an overview of the most promising future directions.

Hepatic artery resection in distal cholangiocarcinoma

PURPOSE

This study aimed to elucidate the safety and oncological outcomes of surgery with hepatic artery resection (HAR) for patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma.

METHODS

The clinical data of patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma who underwent curative intent surgery at Hiroshima University between March 2009 and January 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Eligible patients were classified according to the presence or absence of HAR (HAR and non-HAR group), and clinicopathological features and disease-free survival rates were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Among the 60 patients analyzed, eight patients had received HAR, and the remaining 52 patients had not. The rate of portal vein resection, T stage, and the number of metastasized lymph nodes in the HAR group were significantly greater than those in the non-HAR group (p < 0.001, p = 0.00695, and p = 0.0480, respectively). Postoperative severe complication was confirmed in one patient, and there were no in-hospital deaths in the HAR group. Seven of 8 patients in the HAR group showed recurrence during follow-up, and of those, six patients showed early recurrence within 1 year postoperatively. The disease-free survival time in the HAR group was significantly shorter than that in the non-HAR group (median: 7.4 m vs. 34.2 m, respectively) (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that lymph node metastasis and HAR were significant risk factors for predicting the adverse disease-free survival time (hazard ratio (HR), 3.21; p = 0.0142; HR, 4.47; p = 0.0346, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with distal cholangiocarcinoma who underwent surgery with HAR tended to show early recurrences, although HAR could be performed safely.

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.

The evolving role of radiation in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the fourth leading cause of cancer mortality in the United States. Chemotherapy in resectable pancreatic cancer has improved survival by 10-20%. It only converted 10-30% of the borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancers to be surgically resectable. Radiation therapy has a documented role in managing localized pancreatic cancer, more so for borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer, where it can potentially improve the resectability rate of a given neoadjuvant treatment. The role of radiation therapy in resected pancreatic cancer is controversial, but it is used routinely to treat positive margins after pancreatic cancer surgery. Radiation therapy paradigms continue to evolve with advancements in treatment modalities, delivery techniques, and combination approaches. Despite the advances, there continues to be a controversy on the role of radiation therapy in managing this disease. In this review article, we discuss the recent updates, delivery techniques, and motion management in radiation therapy and dissect the applicability of this therapy in pancreatic cancer.

Evaluation of Adjuvant Chemotherapy Survival Outcomes Among Patients With Surgically Resected Pancreatic Carcinoma With Node-Negative Disease After Neoadjuvant Therapy

Importance

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is rarely associated with a complete histopathologic response in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) but results in downstaging of regional nodal disease. Such nodal downstaging after NAT may have implications for the use of additional adjuvant therapy (AT).

Objectives

To examine the prognostic implications of AT in patients with node-negative (N0) disease after NAT and to identify factors associated with progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective review was conducted using data from 2 high-volume, tertiary care academic centers (University of Pittsburgh Medical Center and the Medical College of Wisconsin). Prospectively maintained pancreatic cancer databases at both institutes were searched to identify patients with localized PDAC treated with preoperative therapy and subsequent surgical resection between 2010 and 2019, with N0 disease on final histopathology.

Exposures

Patients received NAT consisting of chemotherapy with or without concomitant neoadjuvant radiation (NART). For patients who received NART, chemotherapy regimens were gemcitabine or 5-fluoururacil based and included stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) or intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) after all intended chemotherapy and approximately 4 to 5 weeks before anticipated surgery. Adjuvant therapy consisted of gemcitabine-based therapy or FOLFIRINOX; when used, adjuvant radiation was commonly administered as either SBRT or IMRT.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The association of AT with PFS and OS was evaluated in the overall cohort and in different subgroups. The interaction between AT and other clinicopathologic variables was examined on Cox proportional hazards regression analysis.

Results

In this cohort study, 430 consecutive patients were treated between 2010 and 2019. Patients had a mean (SD) age of 65.2 (9.4) years, and 220 (51.2%) were women. The predominant NAT was gemcitabine based (196 patients [45.6%]), with a median duration of 2.7 cycles (IQR, 1.5-3.4). Neoadjuvant radiation was administered to 279 patients (64.9%). Pancreatoduodenectomy was performed in 310 patients (72.1%), and 160 (37.2%) required concomitant vascular resection. The median lymph node yield was 26 (IQR, 19-34); perineural invasion (PNI), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), and residual positive margins (R1) were found in 254 (59.3%), 92 (22.0%), and 87 (21.1%) patients, respectively. The restricted mean OS was 5.2 years (95% CI, 4.8-5.7). On adjusted analysis, PNI, LVI, and poorly differentiated tumors were independently associated with worse PFS and OS in N0 disease after NAT, with hazard ratios (95% CIs) of 2.04 (1.43-2.92; P < .001) and 1.68 (1.14-2.48; P = .009), 1.47 (1.08-1.98; P = .01) and 1.54 (1.10-2.14; P = .01), and 1.90 (1.18-3.07; P = .008) and 1.98 (1.20-3.26; P = .008), respectively. Although AT was associated with prolonged survival in the overall cohort, the effect was reduced in patients who received NART and strengthened in patients with PNI (AT × PNI interaction: hazard ratio, 0.55 [95% CI, 0.32-0.97]; P = .04).

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this cohort study suggest a survival benefit for AT in patients with N0 disease after NAT and surgical resection. This survival benefit may be most pronounced in patients with PNI.

Negative prognostic impact of sarcopenia before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer

OBJECTIVES

To elucidate the prognostic impact of sarcopenia before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) for pancreatic cancer (PC).

METHODS

We retrospectively studied 75 consecutive PC patients who underwent neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus S-1 combination therapy followed by pancreatectomy between 2008 and 2016. According to the skeletal muscle volume index (SMI), the patients were divided into the muscle attenuation group (MAG) and normal group (NG) before or after NAC. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) were analyzed by Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

The MAG showed significantly poorer OS than the NG before and after NAC. Pre-NAC, median OS was 20.0 months in the MAG versus 49.0 months in the NG (p = 0.006). Post-NAC, median OS was 21.3 months in the MAG versus 48.8 months in the NG (p = 0.014). Multivariate analysis, excluding muscle attenuation after NAC because of confounding factors and lower hazard ratio (2.08, 95% confidence interval: 1.14-3.78, p = 0.016) than that before NAC (2.14, 1.23-3.70, p = 0.007) by univariate analysis, revealed the following independent prognostic factors: muscle attenuation pre-NAC (2.25, 1.26-4.05, p = 0.007); borderline resectability (1.96, 1.04-3.69, p = 0.038); operative blood loss (2.60, 1.38-4.88, p = 0.003); and distant metastasis (3.31, 1.40-7.82, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Sarcopenia before and after NAC for PC is suggested to be a poor prognostic factor, with a stronger impact before than after NAC.

A Prospective Multicenter Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy with Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel for Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer with Arterial Involvement

BACKGROUND

Only two clinical trials have shown the effects of neoadjuvant treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with arterial involvement (BRPC-A). Here, we aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) for BRPC-A.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A prospective, single-arm, multicenter phase II trial was conducted. Patients who were radiologically and histologically diagnosed with BRPC-A were enrolled. A central review was conducted to confirm the presence of BRPC-A. Patients received two to four cycles of GnP before surgery. The primary endpoint of the study was the R0 resection rate. Overall survival (OS) was evaluated in an ancillary study.

RESULTS

Thirty-five patients were enrolled, of whom 33 were subjected to central review and 28 were confirmed to have BRPC-A. All eligible patients with BRPC-A received neoadjuvant GnP. Nineteen patients underwent pancreatic resections. Postoperative complications of Clavien-Dindo IIIa or lower were observed in 11 patients. No treatment-related mortalities were observed. R0 resection was achieved in 17 patients (89%); the R0 resection rate was 61% in eligible patients. One patient underwent curative resection after termination of the treatment protocol, resulting in an overall R0 resection rate of 64%. The median overall survival (OS) and 2-year OS rate were 24.9 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 19.0 months to not estimatable] and 53.6%, respectively. OS in patients with BRPC-A who achieved overall R0 resection was significantly longer than that in the other patients (p = 0.0255).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant GnP is a safe and effective strategy for BRPC-A, providing a chance for curative resection and improved survival.

Current Treatment of Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Medical Oncologist's Perspective

Pancreatic cancer has traditionally been associated with a dismal prognosis, even in early stages of the disease. In recent years, the introduction of newer generation chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant setting has improved the survival of patients treated with upfront resection. However, there are multiple theoretical advantages to deliver early systemic therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer. So far, the evidence supports the use of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The benefit of this treatment sequence for patients with resectable disease remains elusive. In this review, we summarize the data on adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer and describe which evidence backs the use of neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, we address important issues faced in clinical practice when treating patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

Perioperative oncolytic virotherapy to counteract surgery-induced immunosuppression and improve outcomes in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a high fatality cancer with one of the worst prognoses in solid tumors. Most patients present with late stage, metastatic disease and are not eligible for potentially curative surgery. Despite complete resection, the majority of surgical patients will recur within the first two years following surgery. Postoperative immunosuppression has been described in different digestive cancers. While the underlying mechanism is not fully understood, there is compelling evidence to link surgery with disease progression and cancer metastasis in the postoperative period. However, the idea of surgery-induced immunosuppression as a facilitator of recurrence and metastatic spread has not been explored in the context of pancreatic cancer. By surveying the existing literature on surgical stress in mostly digestive cancers, we propose a novel practice-changing paradigm: alleviate surgery-induced immunosuppression and improve oncological outcome in PDAC surgical patients by administering oncolytic virotherapy in the perioperative period.

Perioperative or only adjuvant gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel for resectable pancreatic cancer (NEONAX)-a randomized phase II trial of the AIO pancreatic cancer group

BACKGROUND

Data on perioperative chemotherapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (rPDAC) are limited. NEONAX examined perioperative or adjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in rPDAC (National Comprehensive Cancer Network criteria).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

NEONAX is a prospective, randomized phase II trial with two independent experimental arms. One hundred twenty-seven rPDAC patients in 22 German centers were randomized 1 : 1 to perioperative (two pre-operative and four post-operative cycles, arm A) or adjuvant (six cycles, arm B) gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2) and nab-paclitaxel (125 mg/m2) on days 1, 8 and 15 of a 28-day cycle.

RESULTS

The primary endpoint was disease-free survival (DFS) at 18 months in the modified intention-to-treat (ITT) population [R0/R1-resected patients who started neoadjuvant chemotherapy (CTX) (A) or adjuvant CTX (B)]. The pre-defined DFS rate of 55% at 18 months was not reached in both arms [A: 33.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 18.5% to 48.1%), B: 41.4% (95% CI 20.7% to 62.0%)]. Ninety percent of patients in arm A completed neoadjuvant treatment, and 42% of patients in arm B started adjuvant chemotherapy. R0 resection rate was 88% (arm A) and 67% (arm B), respectively. Median overall survival (mOS) (ITT population) as a secondary endpoint was 25.5 months (95% CI 19.7-29.7 months) in arm A and 16.7 months (95% CI 11.6-22.2 months) in the upfront surgery arm. This difference corresponds to a median DFS (mDFS) (ITT) of 11.5 months (95% CI 8.8-14.5 months) in arm A and 5.9 months (95% CI 3.6-11.5 months) in arm B. Treatment was safe and well tolerable in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary endpoint, DFS rate of 55% at 18 months (mITT population), was not reached in either arm of the trial and numerically favored the upfront surgery arm B. mOS (ITT population), a secondary endpoint, numerically favored the neoadjuvant arm A [25.5 months (95% CI 19.7-29.7months); arm B 16.7 months (95% CI 11.6-22.2 months)]. There was a difference in chemotherapy exposure with 90% of patients in arm A completing pre-operative chemotherapy and 58% of patients starting adjuvant chemotherapy in arm B. Neoadjuvant/perioperative treatment is a novel option for patients with resectable PDAC. However, the optimal treatment regimen has yet to be defined. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02047513) and the European Clinical Trials Database (EudraCT 2013-005559-34).

Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma Management

The management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has evolved over the last two decades. Surgical resection remain the only potential cure for this cancer. Therefore, there is an emerging emphasis on neoadjuvant therapy to maximize the probability of resection, and identify failures early. The benefit of FOLFIRINOX in various clinical stages of PDAC have been practice changing. The addition of nab-paclitaxel to the traditional gemcitabine regimen added another option for treatment. In addition, immunotherapy and targeted therapies are applicable, based on molecular features and germline alterations; albeit, these are applicable to only a small minority of patients. In this review article, we discuss the key extant literature relevant to various stages of pancreatic cancer. We also summarize ongoing clinical trials which may guide future treatments.

Interplay between MAP kinases and tumor microenvironment: Opportunity for immunotherapy in pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC), commonly called pancreatic cancer, is aggressive cancer usually detected at a late stage, limiting treatment options with modest clinical responses. It is projected that by 2030, PDAC will be the second most common cause of cancer-related mortality in the United States. Drug resistance in PDAC is common and significantly affects patients' overall survival (OS). Oncogenic KRAS mutations are nearly uniform in PDAC, affecting over 90% of patients. However, effective drugs directed to target prevalent KRAS mutants in pancreatic cancer are not in clinical practice. Accordingly, efforts are continued on identifying alternative druggable target(s) or approaches to improve patient outcomes with PDAC. In most PDAC cases, the KRAS mutations turn-on the RAF-MEK-MAPK pathways, leading to pancreatic tumorigenesis. The MAPK signaling cascade (MAP4K→MAP3K→MAP2K→MAPK) plays a central role in the pancreatic cancer tumor microenvironment (TME) and chemotherapy resistance. The immunosuppressive pancreatic cancer TME is another unfavorable factor affecting the therapeutic efficacy of chemotherapy and immunotherapy. The immune checkpoint proteins (ICPs), including CTLA-4, PD-1, PD-L1, and PD-L2, are critical players in T cell dysfunction and pancreatic tumor cell growth. Here, we review the activation of MAPKs, a molecular trait of KRAS mutations and their impact on pancreatic cancer TME, chemoresistance, and expression of ICPs that could influence the clinical outcomes in PDAC patients. Therefore, understanding the interplay between MAPK pathways and TME could help to design rational therapy combining immunotherapy and MAPK inhibitors for pancreatic cancer treatment.

Clustering analysis and prognostic model based on PI3K/AKT-related genes in pancreatic cancer

Background

Pancreatic cancer is one of most aggressive malignancies with a dismal prognosis. Activation of PI3K/AKT signaling is instrumental in pancreatic cancer tumorigenesis. The aims of this study were to identify the molecular clustering, prognostic value, relationship with tumor immunity and targeting of PI3K/AKT-related genes (PARGs) in pancreatic cancer using bioinformatics.

Methods

The GSEA website was searched for PARGs, and pancreatic cancer-related mRNA data and clinical profiles were obtained through TCGA downloads. Prognosis-related genes were identified by univariate Cox regression analysis, and samples were further clustered by unsupervised methods to identify significant differences in survival, clinical information and immune infiltration between categories. Next, a prognostic model was constructed using Lasso regression analysis. The model was well validated by univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and ROC curves, and correlations between risk scores and patient pathological characteristics were identified. Finally, GSEA, drug prediction and immune checkpoint protein analyses were performed.

Results

Pancreatic cancers were divided into Cluster 1 (C1) and Cluster 2 (C1) according to PARG mRNA expression. C1 exhibited longer overall survival (OS) and higher immune scores and CTLA4 expression, whereas C2 exhibited more abundant PD-L1. A 6-PARG-based prognostic model was constructed to divide pancreatic cancer patients into a high-risk score (HRS) group and a low-risk score (LRS) group, where the HRS group exhibited worse OS. The risk score was defined as an independent predictor of OS. The HRS group was significantly associated with pancreatic cancer metastasis, aggregation and immune score. Furthermore, the HRS group exhibited immunosuppression and was sensitive to radiotherapy and guitarbine chemotherapy. Multidrug sensitivity prediction analysis indicated that the HRS group may be sensitive to PI3K/AKT signaling inhibitors (PIK-93, GSK2126458, CAL-101 and rapamycin) and ATP concentration regulators (Thapsigargin). In addition, we confirmed the oncogenic effect of protein phosphatase 2 regulatory subunit B'' subunit alpha (PPP2R3A) in pancreatic cancer in vitro and in vivo.

Conclusions

PARGs predict prognosis, tumor immune profile, radiotherapy and chemotherapy drug sensitivity and are potential predictive markers for pancreatic cancer treatment that can help clinicians make decisions and personalize treatment.

Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Challenges for Clinical Management

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a significant worldwide health problem with a poor prognosis. A borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) is a tumor with limited vascular involvement that is technically resectable but with a high risk of positive margins (R1 resection).

Objective

To identify the current challenges that exist in the management of BR-PDAC.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted to identify articles discussing the definitions and management of BR-PDAC.

Key Findings

Several anatomic definitions of BR-PDAC exist, and there is significant heterogeneity in their utilization across published trials. To improve the odds of a margin negative (R0) resection, a neoadjuvant treatment approach involving chemotherapy with or without radiation is currently preferred. While supporting the efficacy of a neoadjuvant approach in BR-PDAC, the largest published randomized trials have utilized older gemcitabine-based regimens. Recently published Phase II evidence and meta-analyses have supported the use of modern multi-agent regimens such as FOLFIRINOX. The utility of adding radiation to a chemotherapy backbone remains in question. Due to remnant fibrosis and edema following neoadjuvant therapy, accurately selecting patients for resection based on a restaging CT scan is challenging. Furthermore, the role of adjuvant therapy in BR-PDAC patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy needs to be defined.

Conclusion

Though progress has been made, the optimal management of BR-PDAC is uncertain. Phase III trials utilizing modern chemotherapeutic regimens are needed to establish a standard of care.

Preclinical evaluation of pentagamavunone-1 as monotherapy and combination therapy for pancreatic cancer in multiple xenograft models

We previously reported that pentagamavunone-1 (PGV-1) effectively inhibited cell proliferation in many types of human tumors, including pancreatic cancer, by inducing M phase (prometaphase) arrest, senescence, and apoptosis with few side effects. However, a detailed evaluation of the effects of PGV-1 on pancreatic cancer cells in an in vivo setting has not yet been conducted. The present study investigated the potential efficacy of PGV-1 as both monotherapy and combination therapy for pancreatic cancer using multiple xenograft mouse assays. A cell-line derived xenograft model (CDX-M) with pancreatic cancer cell line and a patient-derived xenograft mouse model (PDX-M) using resected pancreatic cancer samples without neoadjuvant chemotherapy were established in both heterotopic and orthotopic manners. PGV-1 effectively suppressed tumor formation at the heterotopic and orthotopic sites in CDX-M than in untreated mice. Combination therapy with PGV-1 and gemcitabine more effectively suppressed tumor formation than monotherapy with PGV-1 or gemcitabine when administered after tumor formation. Monotherapy with PGV-1 or gemcitabine less effectively suppressed tumor formation in PDX-M than in CDX-M, whereas combination therapy with PGV-1 and gemcitabine more effectively suppressed tumor formation. PGV-1 as monotherapy and combination therapy with gemcitabine effectively inhibited tumor formation and has potential as an anticancer candidate for pancreatic cancer.

Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part 1: National cancer statistics

BACKGROUND

The American Cancer Society, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Cancer Institute, and the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries collaborate to provide annual updates on cancer occurrence and trends in the United States.

METHODS

Data on new cancer diagnoses during 2001-2018 were obtained from the North American Association of Central Cancer Registries' Cancer in North America Incidence file, which is comprised of data from Centers for Disease Control and Prevention-funded and National Cancer Institute-funded, population-based cancer registry programs. Data on cancer deaths during 2001-2019 were obtained from the National Center for Health Statistics' National Vital Statistics System. Five-year average incidence and death rates along with trends for all cancers combined and for the leading cancer types are reported by sex, racial/ethnic group, and age.

RESULTS

Overall cancer incidence rates were 497 per 100,000 among males (ranging from 306 among Asian/Pacific Islander males to 544 among Black males) and 431 per 100,000 among females (ranging from 309 among Asian/Pacific Islander females to 473 among American Indian/Alaska Native females) during 2014-2018. The trend during the corresponding period was stable among males and increased 0.2% on average per year among females, with differing trends by sex, racial/ethnic group, and cancer type. Among males, incidence rates increased for three cancers (including pancreas and kidney), were stable for seven cancers (including prostate), and decreased for eight (including lung and larynx) of the 18 most common cancers considered in this analysis. Among females, incidence rates increased for seven cancers (including melanoma, liver, and breast), were stable for four cancers (including uterus), and decreased for seven (including thyroid and ovary) of the 18 most common cancers. Overall cancer death rates decreased by 2.3% per year among males and by 1.9% per year among females during 2015-2019, with the sex-specific declining trend reflected in every major racial/ethnic group. During 2015-2019, death rates decreased for 11 of the 19 most common cancers among males and for 14 of the 20 most common cancers among females, with the steepest declines (>4% per year) reported for lung cancer and melanoma. Five-year survival for adenocarcinoma and neuroendocrine pancreatic cancer improved between 2001 and 2018; however, overall incidence (2001-2018) and mortality (2001-2019) continued to increase for this site. Among children (younger than 15 years), recent trends were stable for incidence and decreased for mortality; and among, adolescents and young adults (aged 15-39 years), recent trends increased for incidence and declined for mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Cancer death rates continued to decline overall, for children, and for adolescents and young adults, and treatment advances have led to accelerated declines in death rates for several sites, such as lung and melanoma. The increases in incidence rates for several common cancers in part reflect changes in risk factors, screening test use, and diagnostic practice. Racial/ethnic differences exist in cancer incidence and mortality, highlighting the need to understand and address inequities. Population-based incidence and mortality data inform prevention, early detection, and treatment efforts to help reduce the cancer burden in the United States.

Complement and Fungal Dysbiosis as Prognostic Markers and Potential Targets in PDAC Treatment

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is still hampered by a dismal prognosis. A better understanding of the tumor microenvironment within the pancreas and of the factors affecting its composition is of utmost importance for developing new diagnostic and treatment tools. In this context, the complement system plays a prominent role. Not only has it been shown to shape a T cell-mediated immune response, but it also directly affects proliferation and apoptosis of the tumor cells, influencing angiogenesis, metastatic spread and therapeutic resistance. This makes complement proteins appealing not only as early biomarkers of PDAC development, but also as therapeutic targets. Fungal dysbiosis is currently the new kid on the block in tumorigenesis with cancer-associated mycobiomes extracted from several cancer types. For PDAC, colonization with the yeast Malassezia seems to promote cancer progression, already in precursor lesions. One responsible mechanism appears to be complement activation via the lectin pathway. In the present article, we review the role of the complement system in tumorigenesis, presenting observations that propose it as the missing link between fungal dysbiosis and PDAC development. We also present the results of a small pilot study supporting the crucial interplay between the complement system and Malassezia colonization in PDAC pathogenesis.

Advanced techniques for performing photodynamic therapy in deep-seated tissues

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) is a promising localized cancer treatment modality. It has been used successfully to treat a range of dermatological conditions with comparable efficacy to conventional treatments. However, some drawbacks limit the clinical utility of PDT in treating deep-seated tumors. Notably, the penetration limitation of UV and visible light, commonly applied to activate photosensitizers, makes PDT incompetent in treating deep-seated tumors. Development in light delivery technologies, especially fiber optics, led to improved clinical strategies for accessing deep tissues for irradiation. However, PDT efficacy issues remained partly due to light penetration limitations. In this review, we first summarized the current PDT applications for deep-seated tumor treatment. Then, the most recent progress in advanced techniques to overcome the light penetration limitation in PDT, including using functional nanomaterials that can either self-illuminate or be activated by near-infrared (NIR) light and X-rays as transducers, and implantable light delivery devices were discussed. Finally, current challenges and future opportunities of these technologies were discussed, which we hope may inspire the development of more effective techniques to enhance PDT efficacy against deep-seated tumors.

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.

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.

Diabetic Ferroptosis and Pancreatic Cancer: Foe or Friend?

Significance: Pancreatic cancer and diabetes have a reciprocal causation relationship. As a potential risk factor, diabetes increases morbidity and promotes pancreatic cancer progression. The main mechanisms include islet dysfunction-induced systemic metabolic disorder, pancreatic stellate cell activation, and immunosuppression. Ferroptosis is regarded as regulated cell death, which participates in chemotherapy resistance and is refractory to radiation therapy and immunotherapy. Diabetes-induced ferroptosis causes many complications, but the underlying mechanism of diabetes-related ferroptosis in pancreatic cancer has not been discussed. Recent Advances: Ferroptosis alleviates pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) progression by activating chronic inflammation. The specific drugs that cause ferroptosis achieve tumor suppression by inducing lipid peroxidation. Ferroptosis plays pro and con roles in cancer. Both the ferroptosis inhibitor and inducer exhibit antitumor effects through killing cancer cells or directly affecting tumor growth. Diabetes-induced ferroptosis contributes to tumor cell death by different components, including tumor cells, fibroblasts, immune cells, and adipocytes. A better understanding of its role in modulating the tumor microenvironment will reveal diabetes-associated ferroptotic features in cancer development, which can be used to figure out possible treatment strategies for cancer patients with hyperglycemia. Critical Issues: We demonstrate the potential roles of diabetes-related ferroptosis in pancreatic cancer progression and discuss ferroptosis-related antitumor effects and therapeutics for pancreatic cancer treatment. Future Directions: Further studies are required to highlight mechanisms of diabetes-mediated ferroptosis in pancreatic cancer tumorigenesis and progression. The antitumor effects of ferroptosis regulators combined with chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy in diabetic patients should be investigated. We hope that pancreatic cancer patients with diabetes will benefit from ferroptosis-related therapies. Antioxid. Redox Signal. 37, 1206-1221.

Neoadjuvant therapy impact in early pancreatic cancer: "bioborderline" vs. "non-bioborderline"

Backgrounds/Aims

To analyze the results of the neoadjuvant treatment of patients in our center with early pancreatic cancer.

Methods

Eighty-four patients with early pancreatic cancer (I-II) were included, of which 59 were considered "bioborderline" (carbohydrate antigen [CA] 19-9 > 37 U/L), and 25 were considered "non-bioborderline" (CA19-9 < 37 U/L). The R0 resection rate, presence of negative nodes, survival, and recurrence rates were analyzed in two groups, the NEO group (neoadjuvant + surgery) and the non-NEO group (upfront surgery).

Results

A 28.6% pathologic complete response was observed in the NEO group of the whole sample. The residual R0 was 85.7%, and nodes were negative in 78.6% of the patients in the NEO group of bioborderline patients. All non-bioborderline patients treated with neoadjuvant were R0, and no affected nodes were observed in any of them. The median overall survival (OS) in patients with elevated CA19-9 levels in the NEO group was 31.4 months vs. 13.1 months in the non-NEO (log-rank test p = 0.006), with a 62% relative reduction in the mortality rate (hazard ratio = 0.38, 95% confidence interval: 0.20-0.79; p = 0.008). The median OS in patients with normal CA19-9 levels in the NEO group was 65.9 months vs. 16.2 months in the non-NEO group, without statistically significant differences between the two but with a trend toward significance (log-rank test p = 0.08).

Conclusions

A neoadjuvant strategy seemed to improve local control and the survival of patients with early pancreatic cancer, both those with elevated CA19-9 and normal marker levels.