AGA Clinical Practice Update on the Epidemiology, Evaluation, and Management of Exocrine Pancreatic Insufficiency: Expert Review

DESCRIPTION

Exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) is a disorder caused by the failure of the pancreas to deliver a minimum/threshold level of specific pancreatic digestive enzymes to the intestine, leading to the maldigestion of nutrients and macronutrients, resulting in their variable deficiencies. EPI is frequently underdiagnosed and, as a result, patients are often not treated appropriately. There is an urgent need to increase awareness of and treatment for this condition. The aim of this American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Clinical Practice Update Expert Review was to provide Best Practice Advice on the epidemiology, evaluation, and management of EPI.

METHODS

This Expert Review was commissioned and approved by the American Gastroenterological Association (AGA) Institute Clinical Practice Updates Committee (CPUC) and the AGA Governing Board to provide timely guidance on a topic of high clinical importance to the AGA membership, and underwent internal peer review by the CPUC and external peer review through standard procedures of Gastroenterology. These Best Practice Advice statements were drawn from a review of the published literature and from expert opinion. Because systematic reviews were not performed, these Best Practice Advice statements do not carry formal ratings regarding the quality of evidence or strength of the presented considerations. Best Practice Advice Statements BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 1: EPI should be suspected in patients with high-risk clinical conditions, such as chronic pancreatitis, relapsing acute pancreatitis, pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, cystic fibrosis, and previous pancreatic surgery. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 2: EPI should be considered in patients with moderate-risk clinical conditions, such as duodenal diseases, including celiac and Crohn's disease; previous intestinal surgery; longstanding diabetes mellitus; and hypersecretory states (eg, Zollinger-Ellison syndrome). BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 3: Clinical features of EPI include steatorrhea with or without diarrhea, weight loss, bloating, excessive flatulence, fat-soluble vitamin deficiencies, and protein-calorie malnutrition. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 4: Fecal elastase test is the most appropriate initial test and must be performed on a semi-solid or solid stool specimen. A fecal elastase level <100 μg/g of stool provides good evidence of EPI, and levels of 100-200 μg/g are indeterminate for EPI. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 5: Fecal elastase testing can be performed while on pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 6: Fecal fat testing is rarely needed and must be performed when on a high-fat diet. Quantitative testing is generally not practical for routine clinical use. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 7: Response to a therapeutic trial of pancreatic enzymes is unreliable for EPI diagnosis. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 8: Cross-sectional imaging methods (computed tomography scan, magnetic resonance imaging, and endoscopic ultrasound) cannot identify EPI, although they play an important role in the diagnosis of benign and malignant pancreatic disease. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 9: Breath tests and direct pancreatic function tests hold promise, but are not widely available in the United States. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 10: Once EPI is diagnosed, treatment with pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) is required. If EPI is left untreated, it will result in complications related to fat malabsorption and malnutrition, having a negative impact on quality of life. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 11: PERT formulations are all derived from porcine sources and are equally effective at equivalent doses. There is a need for H2 or proton pump inhibitor therapy with non-enteric-coated preparations. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 12: PERT should be taken during the meal, with the initial treatment of at least 40,000 USP units of lipase during each meal in adults and one-half of that with snacks. The subsequent dosage can be adjusted based on the meal size and fat content. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 13: Routine supplementation and monitoring of fat-soluble vitamin levels are appropriate. Dietary modifications include a low-moderate fat diet with frequent smaller meals and avoiding very-low-fat diets. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 14: Measures of successful treatment with PERT include reduction in steatorrhea and associated gastrointestinal symptoms; a gain of weight, muscle mass, and muscle function; and improvement in fat-soluble vitamin levels. BEST PRACTICE ADVICE 15: EPI should be monitored and baseline measurements of nutritional status should be obtained (body mass index, quality-of-life measure, and fat-soluble vitamin levels). A baseline dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry scan should be obtained and repeated every 1-2 years.

Propensity Score Matching Analysis of the Safety of Completion Total Pancreatectomy for Remnant Pancreatic Tumors Versus that of Initial Total Pancreatectomy for Primary Pancreatic Tumors

BACKGROUND

The safety and feasibility of completion total pancreatectomy (TP) for remnant pancreatic neoplasms remain controversial and are rarely compared with that of initial TP. Thus, we aimed to compare the safety of these two procedures inducing a pancreatic state.

METHODS

Patients who underwent TP for pancreatic neoplasms between 2006 and 2018 at our institution were included in this study. Tumor pathologies were classified into three subgroups according to survival curves. We used 1:1 propensity score matching (PSM) to analyze age, sex, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and tumor stage. Finally, we analyzed the primary outcome Clavien-Dindo classification (CDC) grade, risks of other safety-related outcomes, and the survival rate of patients with invasive cancer.

RESULTS

Of 54 patients, 16 underwent completion TP (29.6%) and 38 (70.4%) underwent initial TP. Before PSM analysis, age and Charlson Comorbidity Index were significantly higher, and T category and stage were significantly lower for the completion TP group. Upon PSM analysis, these two groups were equivalent in CDC grade [initial TP vs. completion TP: 71.4% (10/14) vs. 78.6% (11/14); p = 0.678] and other safety-related outcomes. Additionally, while the overall survival and recurrence-free survival of patients with invasive cancer were not significantly different between these two groups, the T category and stage tended to be remarkably severe in the initial TP group.

CONCLUSIONS

PSM analysis for prognostic factors showed that completion TP and initial TP have similar safety-related outcomes that can be used as a decision-making reference in the surgery of pancreatic tumors.

Recent Advances in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Strategies to Optimise the Perioperative Nutritional Status in Pancreatoduodenectomy Patients

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy for which the mainstay of treatment is surgical resection, followed by adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients with PDAC are disproportionately affected by malnutrition, which increases the rate of perioperative morbidity and mortality, as well as reducing the chance of completing adjuvant chemotherapy. This review presents the current evidence for pre-, intra-, and post-operative strategies to improve the nutritional status of PDAC patients. Such preoperative strategies include accurate assessment of nutritional status, diagnosis and appropriate treatment of pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, and prehabilitation. Postoperative interventions include accurate monitoring of nutritional intake and proactive use of supplementary feeding methods, as required. There is early evidence to suggest that perioperative supplementation with immunonutrition and probiotics may be beneficial, but further study and understanding of the underlying mechanism of action are required.

Pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer: A national prospective study

OBJECTIVE

UK national guidelines recommend pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) in pancreatic cancer. Over 80% of pancreatic cancers are unresectable and managed in non-surgical units. The aim was to assess variation in PERT prescribing, determine factors associated with its use and identify potential actions to improve prescription rates.

DESIGN

RICOCHET was a national prospective audit of malignant pancreatic, peri-ampullary lesions or malignant biliary obstruction between April and August 2018. This analysis focuses on pancreatic cancer patients and is reported to STROBE guidelines. Multivariable regression analysis was undertaken to assess factors associated with PERT prescribing.

RESULTS

Rates of PERT prescribing varied among the 1350 patients included. 74.4% of patients with potentially resectable disease were prescribed PERT compared to 45.3% with unresectable disease. PERT prescription varied across surgical hospitals but high prescribing rates did not disseminate out to the respective referring network. PERT prescription appeared to be related to the treatment aim for the patient and the amount of clinician contact a patient has. PERT prescription in potentially resectable patients was positively associated with dietitian referral (p = 0.001) and management at hepaticopancreaticobiliary (p = 0.049) or pancreatic unit (p = 0.009). Prescription in unresectable patients also had a negative association with Charlson comorbidity score 5-7 (p = 0.045) or >7 (p = 0.010) and a positive association with clinical nurse specialist review (p = 0.028).

CONCLUSION

Despite national guidance, wide variation and under-treatment with PERT exists. Given that most patients with pancreatic cancer have unresectable disease and are treated in non-surgical hospitals, where prescribing is lowest, strategies to disseminate best practice and overcome barriers to prescribing are urgently required.

Impact of Preoperative Malnutrition on Postoperative Long-Term Outcomes of Patients With Pancreatic Head Cancer

Objective

To evaluate the association between preoperative malnutrition and long-term outcomes in patients with pancreatic head cancer who underwent curative pancreatoduodenectomy (PD).

Methods

From 2004 to 2018, 228 consecutive patients who underwent curative PD for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included. Preoperative malnutrition was defined by the Global Leadership Initiative in Malnutrition criteria. It is based on both phenotypic criteria (weight loss, low body mass index, and reduced muscle mass) and etiologic criteria (reduced intake or assimilation and inflammation).

Results

Seventy-five (32.9%) of 228 patients were classified as suffering from malnutrition. Preoperative malnutrition was associated with an increased risk of estimated blood loss (mL) (816.7 ± 875.2 vs 593.1 ± 489.9, P = 0.015) and longer hospital stay (days) (27.3 ± 15.7 vs 22.9 ± 17.7, P = 0.045). The median follow-up period was 24.5 months. The malnutrition group had poor overall survival compared with "without (WO)-malnutrition" group (P = 0.001) at 1 year (66.3% vs 81.3%), 3 years (18.0% vs 51.8%), and 5 years (12.0% vs 39.3%). The malnutrition group showed poor disease-free survival and cancer-specific survival compared with WO-malnutrition group (P = 0.001) at 1 year (38.9% vs 66.7%) and (69.0% vs 88.7%), 3 years (11.5% vs 45.1%) and (21.1% vs 61.6%), and 5 years (11.5% vs 37.3%) and (14.1% vs 51.2%). In multivariate analysis, the preoperative malnutrition was found to be the predictor of poor prognosis (harzard ratio = 2.29, 95% confidence interval = 1.60-3.29, P = 0.001).

Conclusions

Preoperative malnutrition is associated with poor prognosis in patients who underwent curative PD for pancreatic head cancer.

Management of isolated recurrence after surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

Recurrence of pancreatic cancer after primary pancreatectomy occurs in the vast majority of patients. The role of surgical treatment for recurrent pancreatic cancer is not well established.

METHODS

Patients who underwent primary pancreatectomy with curative intent from 2000 to 2014 at a single large-volume centre were evaluated retrospectively. CT or PET was used to select patients with an isolated recurrence. The clinicopathological features and survival outcomes were compared according to treatment modalities.

RESULTS

Of the 1610 patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent resection, 1346 (83·6 per cent) were diagnosed with recurrent pancreatic cancer. Recurrence was locoregional in 366 patients (27·2 per cent), distant multifocal in 251 (18·6 per cent), distant isolated in 188 (14·0 per cent), locoregional plus distant in 153 (11·4 per cent) and peritoneal seeding in 388 (28·8 per cent). Of the 1346 patients with recurrence, 197 (14·6 per cent) had isolated recurrence; of these, 48 (24·4 per cent of all isolated recurrences; 3·6 per cent of all recurrences) underwent resection. Median survival of the 197 patients after diagnosis of isolated recurrence was 14·7 months; it was longer in patients who underwent surgical resection than among those treated non-surgically (23·5 versus 12·0 months; P = 0·014). Multivariable analysis showed that chemotherapy and resection for recurrence were associated with better prognosis. Median survival after recurrence was longest in the 23 patients with isolated pulmonary recurrence (33·3 months). Survival after recurrence was better in patients who underwent resection of isolated recurrence in the remnant pancreas (median 28·0 versus 12·0 months, P = 0·010) and lung (median 36·5 versus 9·5 months; P = 0·010) than in those who did not undergo resection.

CONCLUSION

Surgical resection may be considered an option for treatment of patients with isolated recurrent pancreatic cancer.

Receipt of Curative Resection or Palliative Care for Hepatopancreaticobiliary Tumours (RICOCHET): Protocol for a Nationwide Collaborative Observational Study

BACKGROUND

There are variations in the management of patients with suspected pancreatic and periampullary cancers and/or malignant biliary obstruction. These differences may be due to a number of organizational, institutional, and patient factors that could affect outcomes for those with curable or incurable disease. The Receipt of Curative Resection or Palliative Care for Hepatopancreaticobiliary Tumours (RICOCHET) study will be the first to provide a snapshot of investigative pathways across the United Kingdom to reflect the real-world practice in these patients. The RICOCHET study is contemporary to new national and international clinical guidance and can potentially inform future local and national strategic planning to optimize care for patients with suspected hepatopancreaticobiliary (HPB) malignancies.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to define national variation in the investigative and management pathways of patients with suspected HPB malignancies and to determine the effect of these variations on patient outcomes.

METHODS

The RICOCHET study is a nationwide, multicenter, prospective study. It is led by trainees through collaboration between surgical and medical specialties. Patients with suspected pancreatic cancer, other periampullary cancer, or extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma presenting to hospitals in the United Kingdom will be identified over 90 days. Each case will be followed up for 90 days to collect data on the mode of presentation, investigations, interventions, use of local and specialist multidisciplinary team meetings, and transfer of care between hub and spoke sites. Furthermore, the study will define dates and intervals between key points in the patient pathway.

RESULTS

The RICOCHET study results and analyses will be subject to peer review by presenting them at international cross-specialty conferences and by submitting them for publication in open-access journals. Moreover, our findings will be presented to patient groups and sponsoring charities (eg, Pancreatic Cancer UK), who in turn will disseminate key findings to the primary beneficiaries of the results: the patients. The RICOCHET study was funded in September 2017. Data collection started in April 2018 and the planned end date for data upload is spring 2019. Data analysis will take place in the summer of 2019 and the first results are expected to be published in late 2019 or early 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

The RICOCHET study is a multidisciplinary, prospective, observational study that aims to highlight variability in practice and to determine whether these affect the outcomes of patients with HPB malignancies. This is a trainee-led initiative that utilizes a novel design to achieve full coverage of the differences in diagnostic and management pathways. The RICOCHET study may provide evidence to develop a more standardized approach to managing patients with suspected HPB malignancy.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

DERR1-10.2196/13566.