Meta-analysis of the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on patterns of recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Prognostication for recurrence patterns after curative resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Backgrounds/Aims

This study aimed to investigate patterns and factors affecting recurrence after curative resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

Consecutive patients who underwent curative resection for PDAC (2011-21) and consented to data and tissue collection (Barts Pancreas Tissue Bank) were followed up until May 2023. Clinico-pathological variables were analysed using Cox proportional hazards model.

Results

Of 91 people (42 males [46%]; median age, 71 years [range, 43-86 years]) with a median follow-up of 51 months (95% confidence intervals [CIs], 40-61 months), the recurrence rate was 72.5% (n = 66; 12 loco-regional alone, 11 liver alone, 5 lung alone, 3 peritoneal alone, 29 simultaneous loco-regional and distant metastases, and 6 multi-focal distant metastases at first recurrence diagnosis). The median time to recurrence was 8.5 months (95% CI, 6.6-10.5 months). Median survival after recurrence was 5.8 months (95% CI, 4.2-7.3 months). Stratification by recurrence location revealed significant differences in time to recurrence between loco-regional only recurrence (median, 13.6 months; 95% CI, 11.7-15.5 months) and simultaneous loco-regional with distant recurrence (median, 7.5 months; 95% CI, 4.6-10.4 months; p = 0.02, pairwise log-rank test). Significant predictors for recurrence were systemic inflammation index (SII) ≥ 500 (hazard ratio [HR], 4.5; 95% CI, 1.4-14.3), lymph node ratio ≥ 0.33 (HR, 2.8; 95% CI, 1.4-5.8), and adjuvant chemotherapy (HR, 0.4; 95% CI, 0.2-0.7).

Conclusions

Timing to loco-regional only recurrence was significantly longer than simultaneous loco-regional with distant recurrence. Significant predictors for recurrence were SII, lymph node ration, and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Anatomical and Biological Considerations to Determine Resectability in Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains associated with poor outcomes with a 5-year survival of 12% across all stages of the disease. These poor outcomes are driven by a delay in diagnosis and an early propensity for systemic dissemination of the disease. Recently, aggressive surgical approaches involving complex vascular resections and reconstructions have become more common, thus allowing more locally advanced tumors to be resected. Unfortunately, however, even after the completion of surgery and systemic therapy, approximately 40% of patients experience early recurrence of disease. To determine resectability, many institutions utilize anatomical staging systems based on the presence and extent of vascular involvement of major abdominal vessels around the pancreas. However, these classification systems are based on anatomical considerations only and do not factor in the burden of systemic disease. By integrating the biological criteria, we possibly could avoid futile resections often associated with significant morbidity. Especially patients with anatomically resectable disease who have a heavy burden of radiologically undetected systemic disease most likely do not derive a survival benefit from resection. On the contrary, we could offer complex resections to those who have locally advanced or oligometastatic disease but have favorable systemic biology and are most likely to benefit from resection. This review summarizes the current literature on defining anatomical and biological resectability in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Characterization of an oligometastatic state in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma undergoing systemic chemotherapy

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES

Most patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) will present with distant metastatic disease at diagnosis. We sought to identify clinical characteristics associated with prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients presenting with metastatic PDAC.

MATERIALS/METHODS

Patients presenting with metastatic PDAC that received treatment at our institution with FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine-based chemotherapies between August 1, 2011 and September 1, 2017 were included in the study. Metastatic disease burden was comprehensively characterized radiologically via individual diagnostic imaging segmentation. Landmark analysis was performed at 18 months, and survival curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared between groups via the log-rank test. ECOG and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were calculated for all patients.

RESULTS

121 patients were included with a median age of 62 years (37-86), 40% were female, 25% had ECOG 0 at presentation. Of the 121 patients included, 33% (n = 41) were alive at 12 months and 25% (n = 31) were alive at 18 months. Landmark analysis demonstrated a significant difference between patients surviving <18 months and ≥18 months regarding the presence of lung only metastases (36% vs. 16%, p = 0.04), number of organs with metastases (≥2 vs. 1, p = 0.04), and disease volume (mean of 19.1 cc vs. 1.4 cc, p = 0.04). At Year 1, predictors for improved OS included ECOG status at diagnosis (ECOG 0 vs. ECOG 1, p = 0.04), metastatic disease volume at diagnosis (≤0.1 cc vs. >60 cc, p = 0.004), metastasis only in the liver (p = 0.04), and normalization of CA 19-9 (p < 0.001). At Year 2, the only predictor of improved OS was normalization of the CA 19-9 (p = 0.03). In those patients that normalized their CA 19-9, median overall survival was 16 months.

CONCLUSIONS

In this exploratory analysis normalization of CA-19-9 or volumetric metastatic disease burden less than 0.2 cc demonstrated a remarkable OS, similar to that of patients with non-metastatic disease. These metrics are useful for counseling patients and identifying cohorts that may be optimal for trials exploring metastatic and/or local tumor-directed interventions.

The immune microenvironment after neoadjuvant therapy compared to upfront surgery in patients with pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma increasingly receive neoadjuvant therapy prior to surgery. However, the effect of neoadjuvant therapy on the immune microenvironment remains largely unknown. We analyzed the immune microenvironment in pancreatic cancer tumor tissue samples from patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy compared to patients after upfront surgery to gain knowledge about the immunological environment after therapy.

METHODS

Multispectral imaging was performed on tissue from resected specimens from patients with PDAC who underwent upfront surgery (n = 10), neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (n = 10) or gemcitabine + radiotherapy (gem-RT) (n = 9) followed by surgery. The samples were selected by a dedicated pancreas pathologist from both the central part and the invasive front of the tumor (by the resected vein or venous surface) and subsequently analyzed using the Vectra Polaris.

RESULTS

Patients receiving neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX display a more pro-inflammatory immune profile, with less regulatory T cells and more CD8 T cells in the tumor tissue compared to patients receiving neoadjuvant gem-RTgem-RT or undergoing upfront surgery. Furthermore, CD163+ macrophages were decreased, and a higher CD163- macrophages versus CD163+ macrophages ratio was found in patients with neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. In all treatment groups, percentage of FoxP3+ B cells was significantly higher in tumor tissue compared to adjacent tissue. Furthermore, an increase in regulatory T cells in the tumor tissue was found in patients undergoing upfront surgery or receiving neoadjuvant gem-RT. In the gem-RT group, less CD8 T cells and a higher CD163+ macrophages to CD8 ratio were noted in the tumor tissue, suggesting a more immune suppressive profile in the tumor tissue.

CONCLUSION

Patients receiving neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX display a more pro-inflammatory immune profile compared to patients receiving neoadjuvant gem-RT or undergoing upfront surgery. Furthermore, in all treatment groups, a more immune suppressive microenvironment was found in the tumor tissue compared to the adjacent non-tumorous tissue.

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Role of Total Pancreatectomy as an Alternative to Pancreatoduodenectomy in Patients at High Risk for Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula: Is it a Justifiable Indication?

OBJECTIVE

Examine the potential benefit of total pancreatectomy (TP) as an alternative to pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) in patients at high risk for postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF).

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

TP is mentioned as an alternative to PD in patients at high risk for POPF, but a systematic review is lacking.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analyses using Pubmed, Embase (Ovid), and Cochrane Library to identify studies published up to October 2022, comparing elective single-stage TP for any indication versus PD in patients at high risk for POPF. The primary endpoint was short-term mortality. Secondary endpoints were major morbidity (i.e., Clavien-Dindo grade ≥IIIa) on the short-term and quality of life.

RESULTS

After screening 1212 unique records, five studies with 707 patients (334 TP and 373 high-risk PD) met the eligibility criteria, comprising one randomized controlled trial and four observational studies. The 90-day mortality after TP and PD did not differ (6.3% vs. 6.2%; RR=1.04 [95%CI 0.56-1.93]). Major morbidity rate was lower after TP compared to PD (26.7% vs. 38.3%; RR=0.65 [95%CI 0.48-0.89]), but no significance was seen in matched/randomized studies (29.0% vs. 36.9%; RR = 0.73 [95%CI 0.48-1.10]). Two studies investigated quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30) at a median of 30-52 months, demonstrating comparable global health status after TP and PD (77% [±15] vs. 76% [±20]; P =0.857).

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review and meta-analysis found no reduction in short-term mortality and major morbidity after TP as compared to PD in patients at high risk for POPF. However, if TP is used as a bail-out procedure, the comparable long-term quality of life is reassuring.

Prognostic factor in patient with recurrent pancreatic adenocarcinoma

PURPOSE

To elucidate prognostic factors for post-recurrence survival in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent curative-intent surgery for PDAC between January 2014 and May 2020 were identified. Among them, patients who had postoperative recurrences and received chemotherapy were retrospectively investigated. Independent prognostic factors for survival after recurrence were investigated using multivariate analyses. Eligible patients were divided into two groups according to the presence or absence of the identified prognostic factors, and survival times after recurrence were compared.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients with recurrent PDAC were included. Multivariate analysis showed that red blood cell (RBC) transfusion (HR, 2.80; p = 0.0051), low albumin level (HR, 1.84; p = 0.0402), and high carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) level at recurrence (HR, 2.11; p = 0.0258) were significant predictors of shorter survival after recurrence. The median survival times after recurrence in the transfusion and non-transfusion groups were 5.5 vs. 18.1 months (p < 0.0001), respectively; those in the low and normal albumin groups were 10.1 vs. 18.7 months (p = 0.0049), and those in the high and normal CA19-9 groups were 11.5 vs. 22.6 months (p = 0.0023), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

RBC transfusion, low albumin, and high CA19-9 levels at recurrence negatively affected survival after recurrence in patients with PDAC.

New Treatment Options in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is the seventh leading cause of cancer death across the world. Poor prognosis of PC is associated with several factors, such as diagnosis at an advanced stage, early distant metastases, and remarkable resistance to most conventional treatment options. The pathogenesis of PC seems to be significantly more complicated than originally assumed, and findings in other solid tumours cannot be extrapolated to this malignancy. To develop effective treatment schemes prolonging patient survival, a multidirectional approach encompassing different aspects of the cancer is needed. Particular directions have been established; however, further studies bringing them all together and connecting the strengths of each therapy are needed. This review summarises the current literature and provides an overview of new or emerging therapeutic strategies for the more effective management of metastatic PC.

Perineural Invasion of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma is Associated with Early Recurrence after Neoadjuvant Therapy Followed by Resection

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is increasingly utilized in the treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, there are limited data on risk factors and patterns of recurrence after surgical resection. This study aimed to analyze timing and recurrence patterns of PDAC after NAT followed by curative resection.

METHODS

The medical charts of patients with PDAC treated with NAT followed by curative-intent surgical resection at a single health system from January 1, 2012 to January 1, 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Early recurrence was defined as recurrence within 12 months of surgical resection.

RESULTS

91 patients were included and median follow up was 20.1 months. Recurrence occurred in 50 (55%) patients, with median recurrence free survival (RFS) of 11.9 months. Overall, 18 (36%) patients had local and 32 (64%) had distant recurrences. Median RFS and overall survival (OS) between local and distant recurrence were similar. Perineural invasion (PNI) and the presence of a T2 + tumor was significantly higher in recurrence group than in no recurrence group. PNI was a significant risk factor for early recurrence.

CONCLUSION

After NAT and surgical resection of PDAC, disease recurrence was common, with distant metastasis being the most common. PNI was significantly higher in the recurrence group.

No survival benefit with suboptimal CA19-9 response: defining effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy in resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is gaining popularity over a surgery-first (SF) approach in treating resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, what constitutes effective neoadjuvant chemotherapy is unknown.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed resectable and borderline resectable PDAC patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy (2010-2019) at a single institution. Optimal CA19-9 response was defined as normalization AND >50% reduction. We utilized Kaplan-Meier and multivariable-adjusted Cox models and competing risk subdistribution methods for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

586 patients were included in this study. The multivariable-adjusted analysis demonstrated OS benefit in the NAC group only when OS was calculated from diagnosis (HR = 0.72, p = 0.02), but not from surgery (HR = 0.81, p = 0.1). However, in 59 patients who achieved optimal CA19-9 response, OS is significantly longer than the 134 patients with suboptimal CA19-9 response (39.3 m vs. 21.5 m, p = 0.005) or the 117 SF patients (39.3 m vs. 19.5 m, p < 0.001). Notably, a suboptimal CA19-9 response conferred no OS advantage compared to SF patients. The accumulative incidence of liver metastases (but not other metastases) was significantly reduced only in patients with optimal CA19-9 response to NAC (multivariable-adjusted subdistribution HR = 0.26, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

CA19-9 response to NAC may serve as the marker for effective NAC. These findings warrant validation in a multi-institutional study.

Astatine-211 based radionuclide therapy: Current clinical trial landscape

Astatine-211 (²¹¹At) has physical properties that make it one of the top candidates for use as a radiation source for alpha particle-based radionuclide therapy, also referred to as targeted alpha therapy (TAT). Here, we summarize the main results of the completed clinical trials, further describe ongoing trials, and discuss future prospects.

Prospective Phase II Trials Validate the Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy on Pattern of Recurrence in Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to characterize the patterns of first recurrence after curative-intent resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

We evaluated the first site of recurrence after neoadjuvant treatment as locoregional (LR) or distant metastasis (DM). To validate our findings, we evaluated the pattern from 2 phase II clinical trials evaluating neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) in PDAC.

METHODS

We identified site of first recurrence from a retrospective cohort of patients from 2011 to 2017 treated with NAC followed by chemoradiation and then an operation or an operation first followed by adjuvant therapy, and 2 separate prospective cohorts of patients derived from 2 phase II clinical trials evaluating patients treated with NAC in borderline-resectable and locally advanced PDAC.

RESULTS

In the retrospective cohorts, 160 out of 285 patients (56.1%) recurred after a median disease-free survival (mDFS) of 17.2 months. The pattern of recurrence was DM in 81.9% of patients, versus LR in 11.1%. This pattern was consistent in patients treated with upfront resection and adjuvant chemotherapy (DM 83.0%, LR 16.9%) regardless of margin-involvement (DM 80.1%, LR 19.4%). The use of NAC did not alter pattern of recurrence; 81.7% had DM and 18.3% had LR. This pattern also remained consistent regardless of margin-involvement (DM 94.1%, LR 5.9%). In the Phase II borderline-resectable trial (NCI# 01591733) cohort of 32 patients, the mDFS was 34.2 months. Pattern of recurrence remained predominantly DM (88.9%) versus LR (11.1%). In the Phase II locally-advanced trial (NCI# 01821729) cohort of 34 patients, the mDFS was 30.7 months. Although there was a higher rate of local recurrence in this cohort, pattern of first recurrence remained predominantly DM (66.6%) versus LR (33.3%) and remained consistent independent of margin-status.

CONCLUSIONS

The pattern of recurrence in PDAC is predominantly DM rather than LR, and is consistent regardless of the use of NAC and margin involvement.

How to select the most appropriate adjuvant treatment after neoadjuvant treatment and resection for locally advanced pancreatic cancer?

Adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) significantly improves survival of patients undergoing upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer. After introducing the concept of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) with potent chemotherapy regimens, long term survival has been achieved even in patients with borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (BR/LAPC) following radical resection. The observed pathologic tumor response is strongly predictive of survival and provides a unique opportunity to visualize to what extent the cancer has been sensitive to the administered chemotherapy regimen and may potentially give hint how to personalize further oncologic treatment. Current literature provides only limited and heterogeneous data as to whether and what type of ACT is beneficial after NAT and resection for BR/LAPC. Larger studies suggest that ACT may bring survival advantage and should be attempted particularly in node-positive disease and preferably with more potent regimen such as FOLFIRINOX, if tolerable. In case of complete pathologic response, particularly after FOLFIRINOX, it does not seem beneficial to deescalate the treatment during ACT, but whether continuation on the same regimen is worthwhile needs to be further examined. In case of gemcitabine-based treatment as NAT, continuation with more cycles seems to be of value unless tumor biology proves to be too aggressive, with high lymph node ratio. Whether switch to a different regimen should be sought, if tolerability allows it, needs to be further studied. Whether it is the exact treatment sequence (NAT, ACT or both) of the potent chemotherapy regimens like FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel or the total dose of chemotherapy that has impact on survival in BR/LAPC, is unknown.

Impact of Neoadjuvant Therapy on Survival Following Margin-Positive Resection for Pancreatic Cancer

INTRODUCTION

A positive microscopic margin (R1) following resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) can occur in up to 80% of patients and is associated with reduced survival and increased recurrence. Our aim was to characterize the impact of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) on survival and recurrence in patients with PDAC following an R1 resection.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients with PDAC who underwent pancreatectomy from 2008 to 2017 was performed. Patients were staged according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition and stratified based on resection margin (R0 vs. R1) and treatment sequence (NAT vs. surgery first [SF]). Conditional survival analysis was performed using Cox regression and inverse probability weighted estimates.

RESULTS

Among 580 patients, 59% received NAT and 41% underwent SF. On final pathology, the NAT cohort had smaller tumors and less lymph node (LN) positivity (p < 0.05). NAT was not associated with an R1 resection (50%, p = 0.653). Compared with the R1 cohort, the R0 cohort had a higher median overall survival (OS; 39.6 vs. 22.8 months; hazard ratio [HR] 1.6, p < 0.001) and disease-free survival (DFS; 19 vs. 13 months; HR 1.35, p = 0.004). After risk adjustment, NAT was not associated with OS, regardless of margin status (R0, 95% confidence interval [CI] (-)7.31-27.07, p = 0.26; or R1, 95% CI (-)36.99-15.25, p = 0.42). However, NAT was associated with improved DFS in the R1 cohort (95% CI 1.79-11.91, p = 0.008) but not in the R0 cohort (95% CI (-)11.22-10.54, p = 0.95).

CONCLUSION

An R0 resection remains an important determinant of overall and disease-free survival, even when NAT is administered. For patients with an R1 resection, receipt of NAT may prolong DFS.

Comparison of Clinical Outcomes of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer According to the Neoadjuvant Chemo-Regimens: Gemcitabine versus FOLFIRINOX

Background/Aims

Although many studies have reported the promising effect of neoadjuvant treatment for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) to increase resectability, only a few studies have recommended the use of first-line chemotherapeutic agents as neoadjuvant treatment for BRPC. The current study compared clinical outcomes between gemcitabine and FOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan) in patients with BRPC.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective study, 100 BRPC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and resection from 2008 to 2018 were reviewed. Clinical outcomes included overall survival, resectability, and recurrence patterns after gemcitabine or FOLFIRINOX treatment.

Results

For neoadjuvant chemotherapy, gemcitabine was administered to 34 patients and FOLFIRINOX to 66. Neoadjuvant radiotherapy was administered to 27 patients (79.4%) treated with gemcitabine and 19 (28.8%) treated with FOLFIRINOX (p<0.001). The 2- and 5-year survival rates (YSRs) were significantly higher after FOLFIRINOX (2YSR, 72.2%; 5YSR, 46.0%) than after gemcitabine (2YSR, 58.4%; 5YSR, 19.1%; p=0.041). The margin negative rate was comparable (gemcitabine, 94.1%; FOLFIRINOX, 92.4%; p=0.753), and the tumor size change in percentage showed only a marginal difference (gemcitabine, 20.5%; FOLFIRINOX, 29.0%; p=0.069). Notably, the metastatic recurrence rate was significantly lower in the FOLFIRINOX group (n=20, 52.6%) than in the gemcitabine group (n=22, 78.6%; p=0.001). The rate of adverse events after chemotherapy was significantly higher with FOLFIRINOX than with gemcitabine (43.9%, 20.6%, respectively; p=0.037).

Conclusions

FOLFIRINOX provided more clinical and oncological benefit than gemcitabine, with significantly higher overall survival and lower cumulative recurrence rates in BRPC. However, since FOLFIRINOX causes more adverse effects, the regimen should be individualized based on patient's general condition and clinical status.

Scoring of tumour response after neoadjuvant therapy in resected pancreatic cancer: systematic review

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemo(radio)therapy is used increasingly in pancreatic cancer. Histological evaluation of the tumour response provides information on the efficacy of preoperative treatment and is used to determine prognosis and guide decisions on adjuvant treatment. This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of the current evidence on tumour response scoring systems in pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

Studies reporting on the assessment of resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma following neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy were searched using PubMed and EMBASE. All original studies reporting on histological tumour response in relation to clinical outcome (survival, recurrence-free survival) or interobserver agreement were eligible for inclusion. This systematic review followed the PRISMA guidelines.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 1453 studies of which 25 met the eligibility criteria, revealing 13 unique scoring systems. The most frequently investigated tumour response scoring systems were the College of American Pathologists system, Evans scoring system, and MD Anderson Cancer Center system, investigated 11, 9 and 5 times respectively. Although six studies reported a survival difference between the different grades of these three systems, the reported outcomes were often inconsistent. In addition, 12 of the 25 studies did not report on crucial aspects of pathological examination, such as the method of dissection, sampling approach, and amount of sampling.

CONCLUSION

Numerous scoring systems for the evaluation of tumour response after preoperative chemo(radio)therapy in pancreatic cancer exist, but comparative studies are lacking. More comparative data are needed on the interobserver variability and prognostic significance of the various scoring systems before best practice can be established.

Predictors of early recurrence following neoadjuvant chemotherapy and surgical resection for localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAT) for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is increasingly being utilized. However, a significant number of patients will experience early recurrence, possibly negating the benefit of surgery. We aimed to identify factors implicated in early disease recurrence.

METHODS

A retrospective review of pancreaticoduodenectomies performed between 2005 and 2017 at our institution for PDAC following NAT was performed. A 6-month cut-off was used to stratify patients into early/late recurrence groups. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify predictors of recurrence.

RESULTS

Of 273 patients, 64 (23%) developed early recurrence or died within 90 days of surgery. The median time to recurrence was 4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2-4.3) in the early group versus 16 months (95% CI: 13.7-19.9) in the late group. The former had higher baseline and post-NAT Ca19-9 levels than the latter (472 vs. 153 IU/ml, p = 0.001 and 71 vs. 39 IU/ml, p = 0.005, respectively). A higher positive lymph node ratio significantly increased the risk of early recurrence (hazard ratio [HR]: 15.9, p < 0.001) while adjuvant chemotherapy was protective (HR: 0.4, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our findings acknowledge the limitations of clinically measured factors used to ascertain response to NAT and underline the need for individualized molecular markers that take into consideration the specific tumor biology.

Detailed Analysis of Margin Positivity and the Site of Local Recurrence After Pancreaticoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

The association between a positive surgical margin and local recurrence after resection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been reported. Assessment of the location of the a positive margin and the specific site of local recurrence has not been well described.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database was queried for patients who underwent R0/R1 pancreaticoduodenectomy for PDAC between 2000 and 2015. The pancreatic, posterior, gastric/duodenal, anterior peritoneal, and bile duct margins were routinely assessed. Postoperative imaging was reviewed for the site of first recurrence, and local recurrence was defined as recurrence located in the remnant pancreas, surgical bed, or retroperitoneal site outside the surgical bed.

RESULTS

During the study period, 891 patients underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy, and 390 patients had an initial local recurrence with or without distant metastases. The 5-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence by site included the remnant pancreas (4%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3-5%), the surgical bed (35%; 95% CI, 32-39%), and other regional retroperitoneal site (4%; 95% CI, 3-6%). In the univariate analysis, positive posterior margin (hazard ratio [HR], 1.50; 95% CI, 1.17-1.91; p = 0.001) and positive lymph nodes (HR, 1.36; 95% CI, 1.06-1.75; p = 0.017) were associated with surgical bed recurrence, and in the multivariate analysis, positive posterior margin remained significant (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.09-1.81; p = 0.009). An isolated local recurrence was found in 197 patients, and a positive posterior margin was associated with surgical bed recurrence in this subgroup (HR, 1.51; 95% CI, 1.08-2.10; p = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

In this study, the primary association between site of margin positivity and site of local recurrence was between the posterior margin and surgical bed recurrence. Given this association and the limited ability to modify this margin intraoperatively, preoperative assessment should be emphasized.

Proposal for a definition of "Oligometastatic disease in pancreatic cancer"

Background

To date, patients with metastasized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC M1) are regarded as a uniform collective. We hypothesize the existence of oligometastatic disease (OMD): a state of PDAC M1 disease with better tumor biology, limited metastasis, and increased survival.

Methods

Data of 128 PDAC M1 patients treated at the University of Cologne between 2008 and 2018 was reviewed. Interdependence between clinical parameter was calculated using the Mann-Whitney U-Test. Survival curves were generated using the Kaplan-Meier method and analyzed using the log-rank test.

Results

Eighty-one (63%) patients had metastases confined to one organ (single organ metastasis, SOG) whereas the remaining 47 (37%) showed multiple metastatic sites (multi-organ metastasis, MOG). Survival analysis revealed a median overall survival (OS) of 12.2 months for SOG vs 4.5 months for MOG (95% CI 5.7–9.8; p < 0.001). We defined limited disease by the presence of ≤4 metastases in liver or lung. Limited disease together with CA 19–9 baseline < 1000 U/ml and response or stable disease after first-line chemotherapy defined OMD. We identified 8 patients with hepatic metastases and 2 with pulmonary metastases matching all OMD criteria. This group of 10 (7.8%) had a median overall survival of 19.4 vs 7.2 months compared to the remaining patients (95% CI 5.7–9.8; p = 0.009).

Conclusion

We propose a definition of oligometastatic disease in PDAC including anatomical criteria and biological criteria reflecting better tumor biology. The 10 OMD patients (7.8%) survived significantly longer and might even benefit from surgical resection in the future.

International validation and update of the Amsterdam model for prediction of survival after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to validate and update the Amsterdam prediction model including tumor grade, lymph node ratio, margin status and adjuvant therapy, for prediction of overall survival (OS) after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

We included consecutive patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer between 2000 and 2017 at 11 tertiary centers in 8 countries (USA, UK, Germany, Italy, Sweden, the Netherlands, Korea, Australia). Model performance for prediction of OS was evaluated by calibration statistics and Uno's C-statistic for discrimination. Validation followed the TRIPOD statement.

RESULTS

Overall, 3081 patients (53% male, median age 66 years) were included with a median OS of 24 months, of whom 38% had N2 disease and 77% received adjuvant chemotherapy. Predictions of 3-year OS were fairly similar to observed OS with a calibration slope of 0.72. Statistical updating of the model resulted in an increase of the C-statistic from 0.63 to 0.65 (95% CI 0.64-0.65), ranging from 0.62 to 0.67 across different countries. The area under the curve for the prediction of 3-year OS was 0.71 after updating. Median OS was 36, 25 and 15 months for the low, intermediate and high risk group, respectively (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This large international study validated and updated the Amsterdam model for survival prediction after pancreatoduodenectomy for pancreatic cancer. The model incorporates readily available variables with a fairly accurate model performance and robustness across different countries, while novel markers may be added in the future. The risk groups and web-based calculator www.pancreascalculator.com may facilitate use in daily practice and future trials.

Network meta-analysis comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy and upfront surgery in patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Purpose

Neoadjuvant chemoradiation or chemotherapy has improved the treatment efficacy of patients with resectable, borderline resectable, and locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Due to the optimal regimen remains inconclusive, we aimed to compare these treatments in terms of margin negative (R0) resection rate and overall survival (OS) with Bayesian analysis.

Patients and methods

We reviewed literature titles and abstracts comparing three treatment strategies (neoadjuvant chemoradiation, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and upfront surgery) in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, the American Society of Clinical Oncology and ClinicalTrials.gov database from 2009 to 2018 to estimate relative odds ratios (ORs) for margin negative (R0) resection rate and hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS) in all include trials.

Results

A total of 14 literatures with 1056 patients were enrolled in this Bayesian analysis. In the pairwise meta-analysis from limited head-to-head studies, compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, neoadjuvant chemoradiation showed superior OS significantly (HR 0.8, 95% CI 0.60–0.99, p < 0.001) and there was no significant difference in R0 resection rate (OR 1.02, 95%CI 0.45–2.33, I² = 34.6%). However, in the network meta-analysis from all enrolled clinical trials, neoadjuvant chemoradiation showed significantly higher R0 resection rate over upfront surgery (HR 0.15, 95% CrI 0.02–0.56), whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy did not provide better efficacy in R0 resection over upfront surgery (HR 0.42, 95% CrI 0.02–4.41). For R0 resection rate, neoadjuvant chemoradiation has the highest probability of ranking one compared with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or upfront surgery (79% vs 21% vs 0%). For OS, neoadjuvant chemotherapy has the highest probability of ranking one compared with neoadjuvant chemoradiation or upfront surgery (98% vs 0% vs 2%). Neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with higher rates of postoperative complications (rank worst: 84%), followed by neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (13%) and upfront surgery (3%).

Conclusions

Different neoadjuvant treatment was selected based on various purposes, whether increasing R0 resection rate or not. Future clinical trials comparing neoadjuvant chemoradiation with neoadjuvant chemotherapy are warranted to confirm our results.

Systematic review of clinical prediction models for survival after surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

As more therapeutic options for pancreatic cancer are becoming available, there is a need to improve outcome prediction to support shared decision-making. A systematic evaluation of prediction models in resectable pancreatic cancer is lacking.

METHODS

This systematic review followed the CHARMS and PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to 11 October 2017. Studies reporting development or validation of models predicting survival in resectable pancreatic cancer were included. Models without performance measures, reviews, abstracts or more than 10 per cent of patients not undergoing resection in postoperative models were excluded. Studies were appraised critically.

RESULTS

After screening 4403 studies, 22 (44 319 patients) were included. There were 19 model development/update studies and three validation studies, altogether concerning 21 individual models. Two studies were deemed at low risk of bias. Eight models were developed for the preoperative setting and 13 for the postoperative setting. Most frequently included parameters were differentiation grade (11 of 21 models), nodal status (8 of 21) and serum albumin (7 of 21). Treatment-related variables were included in three models. The C-statistic/area under the curve values ranged from 0·57 to 0·90. Based on study design, validation methods and the availability of web-based calculators, two models were identified as the most promising.

CONCLUSION

Although a large number of prediction models for resectable pancreatic cancer have been reported, most are at high risk of bias and have not been validated externally. This overview of prognostic factors provided practical recommendations that could help in designing easily applicable prediction models to support shared decision-making.