Does preoperative therapy optimize outcomes in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer?

Endoscopic biliary drainage for distal bile duct obstruction due to pancreatic cancer

Approximately 60% of pancreatic cancers occur in the pancreatic head and may present as obstructive jaundice due to bile duct invasion. Obstructive jaundice often leads to poor general conditions and acute cholangitis, interfering with surgery and chemotherapy and requiring biliary drainage. The first choice of treatment for biliary drainage is the endoscopic transpapillary approach. In unresectable tumors, self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are most commonly used and are classified into uncovered and covered SEMSs. Recently, antireflux metal stents and large- or small-diameter SEMSs have become commercially available, and their usefulness has been reported. Plastic stents are infrequently used in patients with resectable biliary obstruction; however, owing to the recent trend in preoperative chemotherapy, SEMSs are frequently used because of the long time to recurrent biliary obstruction. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is often performed in patients who are not eligible for the transpapillary approach, and favorable outcomes have been reported. Different EUS-BD techniques and specialized stents have been developed and can be safely used in high-volume centers. The indications for EUS-BD are expected to further expand in the future.

A prospective randomized control study of neo-adjuvant chemo radiation followed by surgery versus upfront surgery in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic head cancer: Pilot study

Introduction:

Neo-adjuvant chemoradiotherapy may improve survival in resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer, but its feasibility, benefits, and challenges remain unproven in the resource constraint setup of developing countries.

Patients and Methods:

In this single-center randomized trial, patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive preoperative chemoradiotherapy or upfront surgery. Neo-adjuvant therapy consisted of two cycles of chemotherapy of gemcitabine and Nab-paclitaxel, followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy with oral capecitabine combined with radiation therapy to a dose of 25 fractions × 1.8 Gray, followed by surgery and four cycles of adjuvant therapy or upfront surgery and six cycles of adjuvant chemotherapy. The primary end point was overall survival.

Results:

From March 2019 to March 2021, 80 patients were randomly assigned into two groups: 41 in neo-adjuvant therapy and 39 in upfront surgery. Per protocol analysis, 25/31 (80.65%) patients completed the intended neo-adjuvant treatment, with a dropout rate of 19.35%. Recurrent cholangitis due to stent block was the foremost reason for dropout. The median overall survival was 18.90 months with neo-adjuvant and 14.7 months in the upfront surgery group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.58 to 1.05; P = .096). The resection rate was 36/41 (87.80%) in the upfront surgery group versus 14/31 (45.61%) in the NACRT group (P = <.001). The secondary end points favoured neo-adjuvant therapy, R0 resection rate, 92.86% vs. 75%; P = .18, pathologic lymph nodes, 00% vs. 30.56%; P = .006, perineural invasion, 14.29% vs. 36.11%; P = .14.

Conclusion:

The median overall survival and disease-free survival showed an advantage with neo-adjuvant therapy but did not reach statistical significance. The secondary end points favoured neo-adjuvant treatment, but logistics, multiple visits, prolonged treatment, and financial constraints are some of the main hurdles for developing countries to deliver multimodality treatment.

Results of a Randomized Clinical Study of Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel Versus Gemcitabine Plus S-1 as Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (RCT, CSGO-HBP-015)

BACKGROUND

The optimal neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimen for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains uncertain. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) regimens, gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA) and gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS), in patients with resectable/borderline-resectable (R/BR) PDAC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Treatment-naïve patients with R/BR-PDAC were enrolled and randomly allocated. They received two cycles (2 months) of each standard protocol, followed by radical surgery for those without tumor progression in general hospitals belonging to our intergroup. The primary endpoint was to determine the superior regimen on the basis of achieving a 10% increase in the rate of patients with progression-free survival (PFS) at 2 years from allocation.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients were enrolled, with 94 patients randomly assigned to the GS arm (N = 46) or GA arm (N = 48). The 2-year PFS rates did not show the stipulated difference [GA, 31% (24-38%)/GS, 26% (18-33%)], but the Kaplan-Myer analysis showed significance (median PFS, GA/GS 14 months/9 months, P = 0.048; HR 0.71). Secondary endpoint comparisons yielded the following results (GA/GS arm, P-value): rates of severe adverse events during NAC, 73%/78%, P = 0.55; completion rates of the stipulated NAC, 92%/83%, P = 0.71; resection rates, 85%/72%, P = 0.10; average tumor marker (CA19-9) reduction rates, -50%/-21%, P = 0.01; average numbers of lymph node metastasis, 1.7/3.2, P = 0.04; and median overall survival times, 42/22 months, P = 0.26.

CONCLUSIONS

This study found that GA and GS are viable neoadjuvant treatment regimens in R/BR-PDAC. Although the GA group exhibited a favorable PFS outcome, the primary endpoint was not achieved.

The prognosis-based classification model in resectable pancreatic cancer

AIM

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treatment is mainly based on the anatomical resectability classification. However, prognosis-based classification may be more reasonable. In this study, we stratified resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma according to preoperative factors and reconsidered treatment strategies.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 131 patients who underwent upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2007 and 2019. Recurrence within 1 year after surgery was defined as early recurrence, and the risk factors for early recurrence were identified using preoperative factors. Subsequently, we calculated the scores and stratified the participant groups.

RESULTS

Fifty-five (42 %) patients who relapsed within 1 year showed significantly poorer survival than those without recurrence (median overall survival, 14.0 vs. 80.6 months; p < 0.01). Multivariate analysis revealed that a tumor diameter of ≥24 mm (p < 0.01) and preoperative serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 level of ≥380 U/mL (p = 0.04) were the independent risk factors for early recurrence. Early recurrence score was created using these factors, stratifying the participant group into three groups of 0-2 points, and the prognosis was significantly different (median overall survival, 49.3 vs. 31.2 vs. 16.0 months; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

We stratified the upfront surgical cases of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The group with a score of 0 had a good prognosis, and upfront surgery was possibly not futile on patients in poor general condition. The group with a score of 2 had a poor prognosis and may require stronger preoperative treatment.

Comparison of the upfront surgery and neoadjuvant therapy in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Pancreatic cancer is a malignant disease with a dismal prognosis. While neoadjuvant therapy has shown promise in the treatment of pancreatic cancer, its role remains a subject of controversy among physicians. We aimed to evaluate the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Eligible studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science. Studies comparing neoadjuvant therapy with upfront surgery (with or without adjuvant therapy) in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer were included. The primary endpoint assessed was overall survival. A total of 10,022 studies were identified, and the meta-analysis finally enrolled 50 revealed studies. The meta-analysis suggested that neoadjuvant therapy significantly improved the overall survival (HR 0.74, p < 0.001) and recurrence-free survival (HR 0.75, p = 0.006) compared to the upfront surgery approach. Furthermore, neoadjuvant therapy leads to favorable postoperative outcomes, with an enhanced R0 resection rate (OR 1.90, p < 0.001) and reduced lymph node metastasis (OR 0.36, p < 0.001) and perineural invasion (OR 0.42, p < 0.001), although it is associated with a reduced resection rate (OR 0.42, p < 0.001). In addition, patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy experience superior survival benefits compared to those undergoing adjuvant therapy (HR 0.87, p = 0.019). These results are further corroborated by the subgroup analysis of randomized controlled trials. Neoadjuvant therapy has the potential to provide survival benefits and improve postoperative long-term outcomes for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. However, to validate and reinforce these findings, further well-designed and large trials are required.

The benefits of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) was effective in improving overall survival (OS) of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. However, its application in resectable pancreatic cancer remains controversial. This study aimed to determine whether NAT has a greater advantage over conventional upfront surgery (US) in terms of resection rate, R0 resection rate, positive lymph node rate, and OS. We identified articles before October 7, 2022, by searching four electronic databases. The studies included in the meta-analysis all met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used to evaluate the quality of the articles. OS, DFS, resection rate, R0 resection rate and positive lymph nodes rate were extracted. Odds ratio (OR), hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated, and sensitivity analysis and publication bias were used to assess the sources of heterogeneity. In total, 24 studies, involving 1384 (35.66%) patients assigned to NAT and 2497 (64.43%) patients assigned to US, were included in the analysis. NAT could effectively prolong OS (HR 0.73, 95% CI 0.65-0.82, P < 0.001) and DFS (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.84, P < 0.001). Subgroup analysis results of 6 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) also showed that RPC patients could benefit from NAT in the long term (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.58-0.90, P = 0.003). NAT decreased resection rate (OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33-0.55, P < 0.001), but was associated with increased R0 resection rate (OR 2.05, 95% CI 1.47-2.88, P < 0.001) and decreased positive lymph node rate (OR 0.38, 95% CI 0.27-0.52, P < 0.001). Although the application of NAT increases the risk of patients not being able to undergo surgical resection, it can prolong the OS and delay tumor progression in RPC. Therefore, we still expect larger and higher-quality RCTs to confirm the effectiveness of NAT.

Neo-Adjuvant Treatment in Primary Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review and PRISMA-Compliant Updated Metanalysis of Oncological Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Despite advances in treatment, the prognosis of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains poor. Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has gained great interest in hopes of improving survival. However, the results of available studies based on different treatment approaches, such as chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, showed contrasting results. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to clarify the benefit of NAT compared to upfront surgery (US) in primarily resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

A PRISMA literature review identified 139 studies, of which 15 were finally included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. All data from eligible articles was summarized in a systematic summary and then used for the meta-analysis. Specifically, we used HR for OS and DFS and risk estimates (odds ratios) for the R0 resection rate and the N+ rate. The risk of bias was correctly assessed according to the nature of the studies included.

RESULTS

From the pooled HRs, OS for NAT patients was better, with an HR for death of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.90) at a significance level of less than 1%. In the sub-group analysis, no difference was found between patients treated with chemoradiotherapy or chemotherapy exclusively. The meta-analysis of seven studies that reported DFS for NAT resulted in a pooled HR for progression of 0.66 (95% CI: 0.56-0.79) with a significance level of less than 1%. A significantly lower risk of positive lymph nodes (OR: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.32-0.63) and an improved R0 resection rate (OR: 1.70; 95% CI: 1.23-2.36) were also found in patients treated with NAT, despite high heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

NAT is associated with improved survival for patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma; however, the optimal treatment strategy has yet to be defined, and further studies are required.

Comparison of metal versus plastic stent for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing neoadjuvant therapy: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

This study was performed to compare a metal stent (MS) and plastic stent (PS) in terms of efficacy and complications during neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) and the perioperative period.

METHODS

We performed an electronic search of the following databases until 1 June 2022: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies comparing an MS versus PS for PBD in patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing NAT were included.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis showed that use of an MS was associated with lower rates of reintervention (p < 0.00001), delay of NAT (p = 0.007), recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) (p = 0.003), and cholangitis (p = 0.03). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of stent migration (p = 0.31), postoperative complications (p = 0.20), leakage (p = 0.90), and R0 resection (p = 0.50).

CONCLUSIONS

Use of an MS for PBD in patients with pancreatic cancer undergoing NAT followed by surgery was associated with lower rates of reintervention, delay of NAT, RBO, and cholangitis compared with use of a PS. However, the postoperative outcomes were comparable between the MS and PS. Further studies on this topic are recommended.

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy versus immediate surgery for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: Meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials

We aimed to compare resection and survival outcomes of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and immediate surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). In compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement standards, a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted. Random effects modeling was applied to calculate pooled outcome data. Likelihood of type 1 or 2 errors in the meta-analysis model was assessed by trial sequential analysis. A total of 400 patients from four RCTs were included. When RPC and BRPC were analyzed together, neoadjuvant CRT resulted in a higher R0 resection rate (risk ratio [RR]: 1.55, p = 0.004), longer overall survival (mean difference [MD]: 3.75 years, p = 0.009) but lower overall resection rate (RR: 0.83, p = 0.008) compared with immediate surgery. When RPC and BRPC were analyzed separately, neoadjuvant CRT improved R0 resection rate (RR: 3.72, p = 0.004) and overall survival (MD: 6.64, p = 0.004) of patients with BRPC. However, it did not improve R0 resection rate (RR: 1.18, p = 0.13) or overall survival (MD: 0.94, p = 0.57) of patients with RPC. Neoadjuvant CRT might be beneficial for patients with BRPC, but not for patients with RPC. Nevertheless, the best available evidence does not include contemporary chemotherapy regimens. Patients with RPC and those with BRPC should not be combined in the same cohort in future studies.

Neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic cancer: A promising curative method to improve prognosis

Currently, 15 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have been designed to investigate whether neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) benefits patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (R-PA) compared to surgery alone. Five of them have acquired results so far; however, corresponding conclusions have not been obtained. We speculated that the reason for this phenomenon could be that some prognostic factors had proven to be adverse through upfront surgery curative patterns, but some of them were not regarded as independent baseline characteristics, which is important to obtaining comparability between the NAT and upfront surgery groups. This fact could cause bias and lead to the difference in the outcomes of RCTs. In this review, we collate data about risk factors (such as tumor size, resection margin, and lymph node status) influencing the prognoses of patients with R-PA from five RCTs and discuss the possible reasons for the varying outcomes.

Surgical resection is associated with improved long-term survival of patients with resectable pancreatic head cancer compared to multiagent chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Standard of care for resectable pancreatic cancer is a combination of surgical resection (SR) and multiagent chemotherapy (MCT). We aim to determine whether SR or MCT is associated with superior survival for patients receiving only single-modality therapy.

METHODS

Patients with stage I-IIb pancreatic head adenocarcinoma who received either MCT or SR were identified in the NCDB (2013-2015). Following a piecewise approach to estimating hazards over the course of follow-up, conditional overall survival (OS) at 30, 60, and 90 days after treatment initiation was estimated using landmark analyses.

RESULTS

3103 patients received MCT alone (60.3%) and 2043 underwent SR alone (39.7%). SR had an OS disadvantage at 30 (HR 3.99, 95% CI 3.12-5.11) and 60 days (HR 1.85, 95% CI 1.4-2.45), but an OS advantage after 90 days (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.55-0.64). In a landmark analysis conditioned on 90 days survival post treatment initiation, median OS was improved for SR (17.0 vs. 12.2 months, p < 0.0001); SR improved 3-year OS by 21.3% (p < 0.05), despite patients being older (median 72 vs. 67 years, p < 0.0001) with higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity scores (≥2: 11.2 vs. 8.6%, p = 0.006).

CONCLUSION

For patients with resectable pancreatic cancer, SR is associated with superior long-term survival compared to MCT.

Stent Selection in Preoperative Biliary Drainage for Patients With Operable Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Neoadjuvant Therapy: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review

With the increasing use of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in patients with pancreatic cancer to reduce tumor burden on prognosis, preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) is becoming increasingly necessary. The aim of this study was to summarize the latest evidence and compare the clinical efficacy of metal stents (MS) and plastic stents (PS) in patients undergoing neoadjuvant therapy for operable pancreatic cancer. Eligible studies were searched in PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from their inception to September 2021. In this study, RevMan 5.4 was used to perform the analyses. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six retrospective studies with 316 patients were included. All patients had pancreatic cancer and received NAT before surgical resection. Meta-analysis showed that the rate of endoscopic reintervention in MS (26/143, 18%) group was lower than that of PS (122/153, 80%) group (P < 0.05). The rate of stent-related complications in MS group was lower (18/118, 15%) than that of PS (52/117, 44%) group (P = 0.02). But there were no significant differences in operative time, operative blood loss, overall postoperative complications, postoperative hospitalization days and total medical costs between the two groups. For operable pancreatic cancer patients undergoing NAT surgery, MS was preferred over PS in terms of the incidence of endoscopic reintervention and stent-related complications. More clinical trials are needed in the future to confirm these data with higher levels of evidence.

Efficacy and Safety of Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation Therapy Administered for 5 Versus 2 Weeks for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Indications of preoperative treatment for resectable (R-) or borderline resectable (BR-) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are unclear, and the protocol remains to be standardized.

METHODS

Included 65 patients with R- and BR-PDAC with venous involvement (V-) received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with S-1 and 50 Gy of radiation as the 5-week regimen. The outcomes of this group were compared with those of 52 patients who underwent S-1 and 30 Gy of radiation as the 2-week regimen, previously collected as our prospective phase II study.

RESULTS

Compared with the 2-week regimen, there were no significant differences in the rate of protocol completion, adverse events, mortality and morbidity, or R0 resection in the 5-week regimen. In subgroup analyses of R-PDAC, there were no significant differences in overall survival and recurrence-free survival between the groups. In contrast, the 5-week regimen had significantly better overall survival and recurrence-free survival than the 2-week regimen for BRV-PDAC. Similar results were observed after propensity score matching analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The 5-week regimen of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy has good clinical efficacy and safety for R- and BRV-PDAC. The 5-week regimen could achieve better outcomes than the 2-week regimen for BRV-PDAC. In contrast, both regimens achieved similar outcomes for R-PDAC.

Anaesthesia for Pancreatic Surgery

This article provides a broad perspective on the salient perioperative issues encountered when caring for patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in the setting of pancreatic cancer. It describes the epidemiology of pancreatic cancer, the indications for and evolution of pancreatic resection surgery, the challenges faced perioperatively including patient selection, optimization, anesthetic considerations, postoperative analgesia, fluid management, and nutrition and discusses some of the common complications and their management. It finishes by outlining the future directions for research and development required to continue improving outcomes for these patients.

An Immunohistochemical Evaluation of Tumor-Associated Glycans and Mucins as Targets for Molecular Imaging of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Simple Summary

Distinguishing pancreatic cancer from healthy tissue before and during surgery can be enhanced by using molecular tracers directed at molecules on tumor cells allowing high-contrast visualization of tumor tissue, eventually improving diagnosis and surgical removal. Albeit sugar molecules and proteins carrying a large amount of sugars-mucins- have gained significant interest as tumor-specific targets, their relative presence on structures surrounding tumor tissues and lymph node metastases is unknown. The current study shows that the presence of several, but not all, investigated sugar molecules and mucins on pancreatic cancer cells is higher compared to surrounding tissues. Moreover, given their abundance on tumor cells in lymph nodes and their absence on normal lymph nodes, all investigated targets are high-potential targets for visualization of lymph node metastases. This study paves the way for the development of molecular tracers against the targets evaluated herein to allow improvement of pancreatic cancer treatment.

Abstract

Targeted molecular imaging may overcome current challenges in the preoperative and intraoperative delineation of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Tumor-associated glycans Le^a/c/x, sdi-Le^a, sLe^a, sLe^x, sTn as well as mucin-1 (MUC1) and mucin-5AC (MU5AC) have gained significant interest as targets for PDAC imaging. To evaluate their PDAC molecular imaging potential, biomarker expression was determined using immunohistochemistry on PDAC, (surrounding) chronic pancreatitis (CP), healthy pancreatic, duodenum, positive (LN⁺) and negative lymph node (LN⁻) tissues, and quantified using a semi-automated digital image analysis workflow. Positive expression on PDAC tissues was found on 83% for Le^a/c/x, 94% for sdi-Le^a, 98% for sLe^a, 90% for sLe^x, 88% for sTn, 96% for MUC1 and 67% for MUC5AC, where all were not affected by the application of neoadjuvant therapy. Compared to PDAC, all biomarkers were significantly lower expressed on CP, healthy pancreatic and duodenal tissues, except for sTn and MUC1, which showed a strong expression on duodenum (sTn tumor:duodenum ratio: 0.6, p < 0.0001) and healthy pancreatic tissues (MUC1 tumor:pancreas ratio: 1.0, p > 0.9999), respectively. All biomarkers are suitable targets for correct identification of LN⁺, as well as the distinction of LN⁺ from LN⁻ tissues. To conclude, this study paves the way for the development and evaluation of Le^a/c/x-, sdi-Le^a-, sLe^a-, sLe^x- and MUC5AC-specific tracers for molecular imaging of PDAC imaging and their subsequent introduction into the clinic.

Neoadjuvant therapy vs. upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer: An update on a systematic review and meta-analysis

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains controversial in the treatment of pancreatic cancer (PC). Therefore, this meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery (US) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC). Eligible studies were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. The endpoints assessed were R0 resection rate, pathological T stage < 2 rate, positive lymph node rate, and overall survival. A total of 4,588 potentially relevant studies were identified, and 13 studies were included in this study. In patients with RPC, this meta-analysis showed that NAT presented an increased R0 resection rate, pathological T stage < 2 rate, and a remarkably reduced positive lymph node rate compared to US. However, patients receiving NAT did not result in a significantly increased overall survival. These findings supported the application of NAT, especially as a patient selection strategy, in the management of RPC. Additional large clinical studies are needed to determine whether NAT is superior to US.

Randomized phase II study of gemcitabine and S-1 combination therapy versus gemcitabine and nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel combination therapy as neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable/borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC-GS/GA-rP2, CSGO-HBP-015)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a lethal disease, and multimodal strategies, such as surgery plus neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC)/adjuvant chemotherapy, have been attempted to improve survival in patients with localized PDAC. To date, there is one prospective study providing evidence for the superiority of a neoadjuvant strategy over upfront surgery for localized PDAC. However, which NAC regimen is optimal remains unclear.

METHODS

A randomized, exploratory trial is performed to examine the clinical benefits of two chemotherapy regimens, gemcitabine plus S-1 (GS) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GA), as NAC for patients with planned PDAC resection. Patients are enrolled after the diagnosis of resectable or borderline resectable PDAC. They are randomly assigned to either NAC regimen. Adjuvant chemotherapy after curative resection is highly recommended for 6 months in both arms. The primary endpoint is tumor progression-free survival time, and secondary endpoints include the rate of curative resection, the completion rate of protocol therapy, the recurrence type, the overall survival time, and safety. The target sample size is set as at least 100.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first randomized phase II study comparing GS combination therapy with GA combination therapy as NAC for localized pancreatic cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000021484 . This trial began in April 2016.

Optimal management of patients with operable pancreatic head cancer: A Markov decision analysis

INTRODUCTION

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is an emerging strategy for operable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). While NAT increases multimodal therapy completion, it risks functional decline and treatment dropout. We used decision analysis to determine optimal management of localized PDAC and consider risks faced by elderly patients.

METHODS

A Markov cohort decision analysis model evaluated treatment options for a 60-year-old patient with resectable PDAC: (1) upfront pancreaticoduodenectomy or (2) NAT. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. A subanalysis considered the scenario of a 75-year-old patient.

RESULTS

For the base case, NAT offered an incremental survival gain of 4.6 months compared with SF (overall survival: 26.3 vs. 21.7 months). In one-way sensitivity analyses, findings were sensitive to recurrence-free survival for NAT patients undergoing adjuvant, probability of completing NAT, and probability of being resectable at exploration after NAT. On probabilistic analysis, NAT was favored in a majority of trials (97%) with a median survival benefit of 5.1 months. In altering the base case for the 75-year-old scenario, NAT had a survival benefit of 3.8 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis demonstrates a significant benefit to NAT in patients with localized PDAC. This benefit persists even in the elderly cohort.

Perioperative Predictors of Early Recurrence for Resectable and Borderline-Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Simple Summary

Most patients with a pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma develop a recurrence after surgery. Predictive factors may therefore guide therapeutic decision-making. We aimed to identify perioperative predictors of the early recurrence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas. We found that preoperative (>52 U/mL) and postoperative (>37 U/mL) elevated carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels as well as a tumor size >3.0 cm were independently associated with an early recurrence after a pancreatectomy. Furthermore, an early recurrence resulted in a more frequent liver metastasis than a late recurrence, suggesting that patients experiencing a recurrence within 12 months had undetectable micrometastases. Further studies are needed to identify new biomarkers for the detection of clinically occult micrometastases during surgery as current preoperative risk factors are inadequate to accurately identify patients susceptible to an early recurrence of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas.

Abstract

We aimed to identify the perioperative predictors of the early recurrence (ER) of resectable and borderline-resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDACs). After surgery for a PDAC, most patients develop a recurrence. Predictive factors may therefore guide therapeutic decision-making. Patients (n = 234) who underwent a pancreatectomy for a PDAC between 2006 and 2019 were included. The postrecurrence survival (PRS) was estimated using Kaplan–Meier curves. Predictive factors for an ER were assessed using logistic regression analyses; 93 patients (39.7%) were recurrence-free at the last follow-up. Patients with an ER (n = 85, 36.3%), defined as a recurrence within the first 12 months after surgery, had 1- and 2-year PRS rates of 38.7% and 9.5%, respectively, compared with 66.9% and 37.2% for those with a late recurrence (n = 56, 23.9%; both p < 0.001). The most common site of an ER was the liver (55.3%) with a significantly shorter median overall survival time than that with either a local or a lung recurrence (14.5 months; p < 0.001). Preoperative and postoperative risk factors for an ER included a tumor size >3.0 cm (odds ratio (OR): 3.11, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.35–7.14) and preoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) levels >52 U/mL (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.67–6.30) and a pathological tumor size >3.0 cm (OR: 2.00, 95% CI: 1.03–3.90) and postoperative carbohydrate antigen 19-9 levels >37 U/mL (OR: 2.11, 95% CI: 1.02–4.36), respectively. Preoperatively (>52 U/mL) and postoperatively (>37 U/mL) elevated CA19-9 and a tumor size >3.0 cm were independent predictors for an ER after a pancreatectomy for a PDAC.

Survival Trends for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer Using a Multidisciplinary Conference: the Impact of Post-operative Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Despite advances in various treatment modalities, surgical resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) remains the only curative treatment. Data remains limited regarding survival rates for resectable PDA when managed by a multidisciplinary pancreas conference (MDPC). The aim of this study is to assess survival rates, identify significant predictors of mortality, and assess the benefits of adjuvant chemotherapy for resectable PDA following presentation at a MDPC.

METHODS

All patients presented from April 2013 to August 2016 with resectable PDA were discussed at a MDPC at a tertiary care center and were followed prospectively until November 2017. Survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier for age, tumor size, tumor differentiation, T-stage, lymph node status, and completion of adjuvant chemotherapy cycles. Independent predictors of survival were determined using multivariate Cox regression modeling.

RESULTS

After MDPC consensus and exclusions, total of 64 patients underwent successful surgery. Amongst this cohort, 1-, 2-, and 3-year survival was 78.13%, 46.30%, and 27.27%, respectively. A total of 37 patients (58%) initiated and 16 patients (25%) finished chemotherapy following surgery. Log-rank analysis revealed that tumor size, age, surgical margins, lymph node status, and number of adjuvant chemotherapy cycles received significantly influenced post-operative survival. Tumor size (p < 0.001), lymph node status (p = 0.035), and number of adjuvant chemotherapy cycles (p = 0.041) remained significant after multivariate Cox regression model.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that patients with PDA with tumor size > 50 mm and/or lymph node involvement have poor outcomes despite being surgically resectable. Successful completion of adjuvant chemotherapy has better survival outcomes as compared with incomplete or no adjuvant chemotherapy. The role of alternative management such as down-staging with neoadjuvant therapy should be considered.

Adjuvant and neoadjuvant treatment for pancreatic adenocarcinoma

The prognosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma is dismal. Hence, advances in multidisciplinary treatment strategies, including surgery, are urgently needed. Early recurrence of distant organ metastases suggests that there are occult metastases even in cases with resectable disease. Several randomized controlled trials on adjuvant chemotherapy have been conducted to prolong survival after resection. CONKO-001 study was the first to demonstrate significant improvement in disease-free survival after surgery with gemcitabine administration. The JASPAC-01 study showed the superiority of adjuvant S1 over gemcitabine in survival after resection. Based on the results, adjuvant S1 therapy is the prescribed standard of care in Japan. Recently, the PRODIGE 24/CCTG PA.6 study showed that survival of patients treated with a modified FOLFIRINOX regimen as adjuvant therapy was significantly longer than those treated with adjuvant gemcitabine therapy. Although the evidence from these trials on adjuvant chemotherapy have been the gold-standard treatment for curatively resected and fully recovered patients, resectable disease at diagnosis is not the status, resected disease after curative resection. Currently, neoadjuvant therapy is considered to be a promising alternative to surgery for pancreatic cancer. Although there are many reports regarding neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy, so far there has been no solid evidence proving the advantage of this strategy versus standard up-front surgery. Newly obtained results from the Prep-02/JSAP05 randomized phase II/III study, comparing neoadjuvant therapy with up-front surgery, revealed significant improvement in overall survival with neoadjuvant chemotherapy by intention-to-treat analysis. Thus, neoadjuvant intervention might become a new standard strategy in cases undergoing planned resection for pancreatic cancer.

Clinical staging in pancreatic adenocarcinoma underestimates extent of disease

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

We sought to identify the reliability of AJCC clinical staging was in comparison to pathologic staging in surgically resected patients with pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Database Pancreas from 2004 to 2016 and evaluated patients who underwent resection for PDAC with all documented components of clinical and pathologic stage. We first evaluated the distribution of overall clinical stage and pathologic stage and then evaluated for stage migration by assessing the number of patients who shifted from a clinical stage group to a respective pathologic stage group. To further characterize the migratory pattern, we assessed the distribution of clinical and pathologic T-stage and N-stage.

RESULTS

In our cohort of 28,338 patients who underwent resection for PDAC, AJCC clinical staging did not reliably predict pathologic stage. Stage migration after resection was responsible for discrepancies between the distribution of overall clinical stage and pathologic stage. The predominant migration was from patients with clinical stage I disease to pathologic stage II disease. Most patients with clinical T1 and T2 disease were upstaged to pathologic T3 disease and over half of patients with clinical N0 disease were upstaged to pathologic N1 disease after resection.

DISCUSSION

Clinical staging appears to overrepresent early T1, T2, and N0 disease, and underrepresent T3 and N1 disease.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for primary resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Preoperative chemotherapy has shown benefits for locally advanced and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) has also been attempted in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC); however, its role remains controversial. This study aimed to compare the clinical difference between NAC and upfront resection (UR) in RPC.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles from inception to February 2019 that addressed the overall survival in patients with RPC treated with or without NAC to identify eligible studies. Eleven studies were included in the final meta-analysis. The quality assessment of the included studies was based on the Newcastle-Ottawa quality scale. Data of the unresectable rate, R0 resection rate, and positive lymph node rate were also extracted in each study for further analysis. Pooled hazard ratio (HR), odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to assess the strength of the association.

RESULTS

A total of eleven studies (eight cohort studies and three randomized controlled trials) involving 9773 patients were included. Ten of the eleven studies followed the "intention-to-treat" principle. NAC was found to be significantly associated with a higher R0 resection rate (P < 0.0001; OR = 2.62, 95% CI 1.70-4.03) and increased negative lymph node rate (P < 0.00001; OR = 0.34, 95% CI 0.31-0.37). However, compared with the UR group, NAC was related to a lower surgical resection rate (P = 0.0004; OR = 2.18, 95% CI 1.41-3.37). Overall, the NAC group exhibited no benefits in terms of overall survival compared with that in the UR group (P = 0.10; HR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.73-1.03). In the subgroup analysis, however, patients who received gemcitabine-based regimen as the NAC strategy had more favorable overall survival than that in the UR group (P = 0.04; HR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.57-0.99).

CONCLUSIONS

NAC may be associated with a lower resection rate; however, it is associated with an increased R0 resection rate and lymph node negative rate. Although overall survival was similar in patients with or without NAC, gemcitabine-based NAC might provide longer overall survival. Further large-volume, randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the improved prognosis of patients undergoing NAC.

Survival benefits of neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy versus surgery first in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a highly lethal malignancy. Neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy [NAC(R)T] is recommended to use for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and high-risk resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC), but no high-level evidence exists.

Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane library to identify trials comparing survival data of NAC(R)T with SF for RPC or BRPC. Overall survival (OS) was synthesized in analysis of all the patients (intention-to-treat [ITT] analysis) and resected patients respectively.

Results

The meta-analysis included 17 trials with 2286 participants. For BRPC, NAC(R)T improved OS both in ITT analysis (HR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.37–0.65; P < 0.001) and in analysis of resected patients (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.51–0.85; P = 0.001) in comparison to SF, accompanied with comparable overall resection rate [odds ratio (OR), 0.69; 95% Cl, 0.41–1.16; P = 0.159]. Disease-free survival, R0 rate, and recurrence were also in favor of NAC(R)T. For RPC, OS in analysis of resected patients was higher with NAC(R)T (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63–0.89; P = 0.001), but OS in ITT analysis was similar (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.85–1.22; P = 0.818). The overall resection rate (OR, 0.50; 95% Cl, 0.25–0.99; P = 0.048) was lower, but R0 rate was higher with NAC(R)T. No differences in disease-free survival and recurrence between NAC(R)T and SF. Survival benefits of NAC(R)T basically persisted across sensitivity and subgroup analyses.

Conclusions

This meta-analysis demonstrates that NAC(R)T can provide survival benefits in BRPC patients and a subgroup of RPC patients compared with SF. Future research should focus on investigating the potential biomarkers to screen the subgroup of RPC patients who can benefit from neoadjuvant therapy.

Trial registration

CRD42018103086.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer according to intention-to-treat and per-protocol analysis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The effectiveness of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains unclear in resectable pancreatic cancer (PC) as compared with upfront surgery (US). The aim of this study was to investigate the survival gain of NAT over US in resectable PC. PubMed and EMBASE were searched for studies comparing survival outcomes between NAT and US for resectable PC until June 2018. Overall survival (OS) was analyzed according to treatment strategy (NAT versus US) and analytic methods (intention-to-treat analysis (ITT) and per-protocol analysis (PP)). In 14 studies, 2,699 and 6,992 patients were treated with NAT and US, respectively. Although PP analysis showed the survival gain of NAT (HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.68-0.76), ITT analysis did not show the statistical significance (HR 0.96, 95% CI 0.82-1.12). However, NAT completed with subsequent surgery showed better survival over US completed with adjuvant therapy (HR 0.82, 95% CI 0.71-0.93). In conclusion, the supporting evidence for NAT in resectable PC was insufficient because the benefit was not demonstrated in ITT analysis. However, among the patients who completed both surgery and chemotherapy, NAT showed survival benefit over adjuvant therapy. Therefore, NAT could have a role of triaging the patients for surgery even in resectable PC.

A Qualitative Review of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Resectable Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

The aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The MEDLINE and PubMed databases were searched to identify relevant original articles investigating neoadjuvant therapy in resectable PDAC. Qualitative analyses were performed to investigate patient selection, disease stage, impact on perioperative outcomes, and cost-effectiveness. Forty-three studies met inclusion criteria for this review. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for upfront resectable PDAC is cost-effective, safe, may result in lower stage disease and has potential survival advantages. With proper patient selection, neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an appropriate approach for upfront resectable PDAC. Nevertheless, the risk for disease progression and losing a curative surgical window highlights the need for appropriate patient identification, further discovery of superior biomarkers or molecular profiles representative of positive treatment response, and additional prospective comparative study.

Systemic neoadjuvant chemotherapy in modern pancreatic cancer treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma remains a disease with a poor prognosis despite advances in surgery and systemic therapies. Neoadjuvant therapy strategies are a promising alternative to adjuvant chemotherapy. However, their role remains controversial. This meta-analysis aims to clarify the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. Studies comparing neoadjuvant therapy with a surgery first approach (with or without adjuvant therapy) in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were included. The primary outcome assessed was overall survival. A random-effects meta-analysis was performed, together with pooling of unadjusted Kaplan-Meier curve data.

RESULTS

A total of 533 studies were identified that analysed the effect of neoadjuvant therapy in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Twenty-seven studies were included in the final data synthesis. Meta-analysis suggested beneficial effects of neoadjuvant therapy with prolonged survival compared with a surgery-first approach, (hazard ratio 0.72, 95% confidence interval 0.69-0.76). In addition, R0 resection rates were significantly higher in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy (relative risk 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.47-0.55). Individual patient data analysis suggested that overall survival was better for patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that neoadjuvant chemotherapy has a beneficial effect on overall survival in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in comparison with upfront surgery and adjuvant therapy. Further trials are needed to address the need for practice change.

Efficacy and safety of preoperative 5-fluorouracil, cisplatin, and mitomycin C in combination with radiotherapy in patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a long-term follow-up study

Background

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 5-fluorouracil-based neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) in patients with resectable/borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

Methods

This retrospective study investigated the clinicopathological features and > 5-year survival of patients with T3/T4 PDAC who underwent NACRT at our institute between 2003 and 2012.

Results

Seventeen resectable and eight borderline resectable patients were included. The protocol treatment completion and resection rates were 92.0% and 68.0%, respectively. Two patients failed to complete chemotherapy owing to cholangitis or anorexia. Common grade 3 toxicities included anorexia (12%), neutropenia (4%), thrombocytopenia (4%), anemia (4%), and leukopenia (12%). Pathologically negative margins were achieved in 94.1% of patients who underwent pancreatectomy. Pathological response according to Evans’ classification was grade IIA in 10 patients (58.8%), IIB in 5 patients (29.4%), and IV in 2 patients (11.8%). Postoperative pancreatic fistulas were observed in four patients (23.5%), delayed gastric emptying in one patient (5.9%), and other operative morbidities in four patients (23.5%). The 1-, 2-, 5-, and 10-year overall survival rates were 73.9%, 60.9%, 60.9%, and 39.1%, respectively (median follow-up period, 80.3 months).

Conclusions

NACRT is tolerable and beneficial for resectable/borderline resectable PDAC, even in the long-term.

Modified FOLFIRINOX for resected pancreatic cancer: Opportunities and challenges

Pancreatic cancer is one of the leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Adjuvant chemotherapy has been developed based on the experiences made with palliative chemotherapy, and advocated to improve long-term survival of patients with this disease. However, the optimal chemotherapeutic regimen remains controversial. Recently, Conroy et al demonstrated the impressive benefits of modified FOLFIRINOX over gemcitabine alone in the multicenter Partenariat de Recherche en Oncologie Digestive 24 (PRODIGE-24) trial. The remarkable results mark a new milestone in treating resectable pancreatic cancer and have now changed the standard of care for this patient population. In this commentary, we discuss an issue of difference of tumor grade between the PRODIGE-24 trial and previous phase III trials. We also discuss potential biomarkers predicting therapeutic response to modified FOLFIRINOX. Finally, we summarize several ongoing clinical trials of replacing part of the FOLFIRINOX regimen with Xeloda/S-1/nanoliposomal irinotecan for pancreatic cancer.

Upfront Surgery versus Neoadjuvant Therapy for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Systematic Review and Bayesian Network Meta-analysis

Current treatment recommendations for resectable pancreatic cancer support upfront resection and adjuvant therapy. Randomized controlled trials offering comparison with the emerging neoadjuvant approach are lacking. This review aims to compare both treatment strategies for resectable pancreatic cancer. PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Database and Cochrane Databases were searched for studies comparing neoadjuvant and surgery-first with adjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer. A Bayesian network meta-analysis was conducted using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method. Cochrane Collaboration’s risk of bias, ROBINS-I and GRADE tools were used to assess quality and risk of bias of included trials. 9 studies compared neoadjuvant therapy and surgery-first with adjuvant therapy (n = 22,285). Aggregate rate (AR) of R0 resection for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.8008 (0.3636–0.9144) versus 0.7515 (0.2026–0.8611) odds ratio (O.R.) 1.27 (95% CI 0.60–1.96). 1-year survival AR for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.7969 (0.6061–0.9500) versus 0.7481 (0.4848–0.8500) O.R. 1.38 (95% CI 0.69–2.96). 2-year survival AR for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.5178 (0.3000–0.5970) versus 0.5131 (0.2727–0.5346) O.R. 1.26 (95% CI 0.94–1.74). 5-year AR survival for neoadjuvant therapy was 0.2069 (0.0323–0.3300) versus 0.1783 (0.0606–0.2300) O.R. 1.19 (95% CI 0.65–1.73). In conclusion neoadjuvant therapy may offer benefit over surgery-first and adjuvant therapy. However, further randomized controlled trials are needed.

Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer: A Markov decision analysis

Background

Neoadjuvant therapy has emerged as an alternative treatment strategy for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. In the absence of large randomized controlled trials offering a direct comparison, this study aims to use Markov decision analysis to compare efficacy of traditional surgery first (SF) and neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer.

Methods

An advanced Markov decision analysis model was constructed to compare SF and NAT pathways for potentially resectable pancreatic cancer. Transition probabilities were calculated from randomized control and Phase II/III trials after comprehensive literature search. Utility outcomes were measured in overall and quality-adjusted life months (QALMs) on an intention-to-treat basis as the primary outcome. Markov cohort analysis of treatment received was the secondary outcome. Model uncertainties were tested with one and two-way deterministic and probabilistic Monte Carlo sensitivity analysis.

Results

SF gave 23.72 months (18.51 QALMs) versus 20.22 months (16.26 QALMs). Markov Cohort Analysis showed that where all treatment modalities were received NAT gave 35.05 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 30.96 months (24.86QALMs) for R0 resection and 34.08 months (29.87 QALMs) versus 25.85 months (20.72 QALMs) for R1 resection. One-way deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that NAT was superior if the resection rate was greater than 51.04% or below 75.68% in SF pathway. Two-way sensitivity analysis showed that pathway superiority depended on obtaining multimodal treatment in either pathway.

Conclusion

Whilst NAT is a viable alternative to traditional SF approach, superior pathway selection depends on the individual patient’s likelihood of receiving multimodal treatment in either pathway.

Contemporary Opportunity for Prehabilitation as Part of an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Pathway in Colorectal Surgery

The implementation of upfront, preoperative habilitation ("prehabilitation"), as opposed to postoperative habilitation (rehabilitation), provides a unique opportunity to optimize surgical outcomes, while ensuring that patients receive necessary conditioning that may otherwise be significantly delayed by postoperative complications. In this review, opportunities to design, implement, monitor, and evaluate a surgical prehabilitation program in colorectal surgery are discussed, and broken down to include emotional, physical, and nutritional aspects of care in the preoperative setting.

Randomized phase II/III trial of neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer (Prep-02/JSAP05)

A randomized, controlled trial has begun to compare neoadjuvant chemotherapy using gemcitabine and S-1 with upfront surgery for patients planned resection of pancreatic cancer. Patients were enrolled after the diagnosis of resectable or borderline resectable by portal vein involvement pancreatic cancer with histological confirmation. They were randomly assigned to either neoadjuvant chemotherapy or upfront surgery. Adjuvant chemotherapy using S-1 was administered for 6 months to patients with curative resection who fully recovered within 10 weeks after surgery in both arms. The primary endpoint is overall survival; secondary endpoints include adverse events, resection rate, recurrence-free survival, residual tumor status, nodal metastases and tumor marker kinetics. The target sample size was required to be at least 163 (alpha-error 0.05; power 0.8) in both arms. A total of 360 patients were required after considering ineligible cases. This trial began in January 2013 and was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000009634).

Comparison of neoadjuvant therapy and upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a meta-analysis and systematic review

Objective

The role of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) in resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) remains controversial. Therefore, this meta-analysis was performed to compare the clinical differences between NAT and upfront surgery in RPC.

Materials and methods

A systematic literature search was performed in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials databases. Only patients with RPC who underwent tumor resection and received adjuvant or neoadjuvant treatment were enrolled. The OR or HR and 95% CIs were calculated employing fixed-effects or random-effects models. The HR and its 95% CI were extracted from each article that provided survival curve. Publication bias was estimated using funnel plots and Egger’s regression test.

Results

In total, eleven studies were included with 9,386 patients. Of these patients, 2,508 (26.7%) received NAT. For patients with RPC, NAT resulted in an increased R0 resection rate (OR=1.89; 95% CI=1.26–2.83) and a reduced positive lymph node rate (OR=0.34; 95% CI=0.31–0.37) compared with upfront surgery. Nevertheless, patients receiving NAT did not exhibit a significantly increased overall survival (OS) time (HR=0.91; 95% CI=0.79–1.05).

Conclusion

In patients with RPC, R0 resection rate and positive lymph node rate after NAT were superior to those of patients with upfront surgery. The NAT group exhibited no significant effect on OS time when compared with the upfront surgery group. However, this conclusion requires more clinical evidence to improve its credibility.

Meta-analysis comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer

Background

Studies comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in pancreatic cancer may report only patients who underwent resection and so survival will be skewed. The aim of this study was to report survival by intention to treat in a comparison of upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant treatment in resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting median overall survival by intention to treat in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer treated with or without neoadjuvant treatment. Secondary outcomes included overall and R0 resection rate, pathological lymph node rate, reasons for unresectability and toxicity of neoadjuvant treatment.

Results

In total, 38 studies were included with 3484 patients, of whom 1738 (49·9 per cent) had neoadjuvant treatment. The weighted median overall survival by intention to treat was 18·8 months for neoadjuvant treatment and 14·8 months for upfront surgery; the difference was larger among patients whose tumours were resected (26·1 versus 15·0 months respectively). The overall resection rate was lower with neoadjuvant treatment than with upfront surgery (66·0 versus 81·3 per cent; P < 0·001), but the R0 rate was higher (86·8 (95 per cent c.i. 84·6 to 88·7) versus 66·9 (64·2 to 69·6) per cent; P < 0·001). Reported by intention to treat, the R0 rates were 58·0 and 54·9 per cent respectively (P = 0·088). The pathological lymph node rate was 43·8 per cent after neoadjuvant therapy and 64·8 per cent in the upfront surgery group (P < 0·001). Toxicity of at least grade III was reported in up to 64 per cent of the patients.

Conclusion

Neoadjuvant treatment appears to improve overall survival by intention to treat, despite lower overall resection rates for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016049374.

Improved survival with neoadjuvant treatment

Polymer-Mediated Inhibition of Pro-invasive Nucleic Acid DAMPs and Microvesicles Limits Pancreatic Cancer Metastasis

Nucleic acid binding polymers (NABPs) have been extensively used as vehicles for DNA and RNA delivery. More recently, we discovered that a subset of these NABPs can also serve as anti-inflammatory agents by capturing pro-inflammatory extracellular nucleic acids and associated protein complexes that promote activation of toll-like receptors (TLRs) in diseases such as lupus erythematosus. Nucleic-acid-mediated TLR signaling also facilitates tumor progression and metastasis in several cancers, including pancreatic cancer (PC). In addition, extracellular DNA and RNA circulate on or within lipid microvesicles, such as microparticles or exosomes, which also promote metastasis by inducing pro-tumorigenic signaling in cancer cells and pre-conditioning secondary sites for metastatic establishment. Here, we explore the use of an NABP, the 3^rd generation polyamidoamine dendrimer (PAMAM-G3), as an anti-metastatic agent. We show that PAMAM-G3 not only inhibits nucleic-acid-mediated activation of TLRs and invasion of PC tumor cells in vitro, but can also directly bind extracellular microvesicles to neutralize their pro-invasive effects as well. Moreover, we demonstrate that PAMAM-G3 dramatically reduces liver metastases in a syngeneic murine model of PC. Our findings identify a promising therapeutic application of NABPs for combating metastatic disease in PC and potentially other malignancies.

Contemporary Management of Localized Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is the third most common cause of cancer deaths in the United States. Surgical resection with negative margins still constitutes the cornerstone of potentially curative therapy, but is possible only in 15–20% of patients at the time of initial diagnosis. Accumulating evidence suggests that the neoadjuvant approach may improve R0 resection rate in localized resectable and borderline resectable diseases, and potentially downstage locally advanced disease to achieve surgical resection, though the impact on survival is to be determined. Despite advancements in the last decade in developing effective combinational chemo-radio therapeutic options, preoperative treatment strategies, and better peri-operative care, pancreatic cancer continues to carry a dismal prognosis in the majority. Prodigious efforts are currently being made in optimizing the neoadjuvant therapy with a better toxicity profile, developing novel agents, imaging techniques, and identification of biomarkers for the disease. Advancement in our understanding of the tumor microenvironment and molecular pathology is urgently needed to facilitate the development of novel targeted and immunotherapies for this setting. In this review, we detail the current literature on contemporary management of resectable, borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer with a focus on future directions in the field.

Neoadjuvant treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 5520 patients

BACKGROUND

Recent years have seen standardization of the anatomic definitions of pancreatic adenocarcinoma, and increasing utilization of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). The aim of the current review was to summarize the evidence for NAT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma since 2009, when consensus criteria for resectable (R), borderline resectable (BR), and locally advanced (LA) disease were endorsed.

METHODS

PubMed search was undertaken along with extensive backward search of the references of published articles to identify studies utilizing NAT for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Abstracts from ASCO-GI 2014 and 2015 were also searched.

RESULTS

A total of 96 studies including 5520 patients were included in the final quantitative synthesis. Pooled estimates revealed 36% grade ≥ 3 toxicities, 5% biliary complications, 21% hospitalization rate and low mortality (0%, range 0-16%) during NAT. The majority of patients (59%) had stable disease. On an intention-to-treat basis, R0-resection rates varied from 63% among R patients to 23% among LA patients. R0 rates were > 80% among all patients who were resected after NAT. Among R and BR patients who underwent resection after NAT, median OS was 30 and 27.4 months, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study summarizes the recent literature for NAT in pancreatic adenocarcinoma and demonstrates improving outcomes after NAT compared to those historically associated with a surgery-first approach for pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Pancreatic Cancer

The role of radiation therapy in the management of pancreatic cancer represents an area of some controversy. However, local disease progression remains a significant cause of morbidity and even mortality for patients with this disease. Stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is an emerging treatment option for pancreatic cancer, primarily for locally advanced (unresectable) disease as it can provide a therapeutic benefit with significant advantages for patients' quality of life over standard conventional chemoradiation. There may also be a role for SBRT as neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable disease to allow conversion to resectability. The objective of this review is to present the data supporting SBRT in pancreatic cancer as well as the potential limitations and caveats of current studies.

The impact of neoadjuvant therapy on the histopathological features of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Due to increased rates of curative tumor resections exceeding 60% after FOLFIRINOX-treatment, neoadjuvant therapy/NTx is increasingly recognized as an effective therapy option for downstaging borderline or locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma/PDAC. Yet, the effects of NTx on the common histopathological features of PDAC have not been systematically analysed. Therefore, the aim of the current study was to assess the impact of NTx on relevant histopathological features of PDAC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Biomedical databases were systematically screened for predefined searching terms related to NTx and PDAC. The Preferred-Reporting-Items-for-Systematic-review-and-Meta-Analysis/PRISMA-guidelines were used to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis. Articles meeting the predefined criteria were analysed on relevance, and a meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 9031 studies could be identified that analysed the effect of NTx on PDAC. Only 35 studies presented comparative data on the histological features of neoadjuvantly treated vs. upfront resected PDAC patients. In meta-analyses, the beneficial effect of NTx was reflected by reduced tumor size (T1/2: RR 2.87, 95%-CI: 1.52-5.42, P=0.001, T3/4: RR 0.78, 95%-CI: 0.69-0.89, P=0.0002), lower N-Stage (N0: RR 2.14, 95%-CI: 1.85-2.46, P<0.00001, N1: RR 0.59, 95%-CI: 0.53-0.65, P<0.00001), higher R0-rates (R0: RR 1.13, 95%-CI: 1.08-1.18, P<0.00001, R1: RR 0.66, 95%-CI: 0.58-0.76, P<0.00001), less perineural invasion (Pn1: RR 0.78, 95%-CI: 0.73-0.83, P<0.00001), less lymphatic vessel invasion (RR: 0.50, 95%-CI: 0.36-0.70, P<0.0001) and fewer G3-tumors (RR 0.82, 95%-CI: 0.71-0.94, P=0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

NTx in PDAC seems to exert its beneficial effect in borderline or locally advanced PDAC over genuine tumor downstaging. Thus, although at least 40% of all NTx treated patients remain unresectable even with modern NTx regimes, neoadjuvantly treated PDAC showed not only increasing resectability rates especially after FOLFIRINOX, but even reach a lower tumor stage than primarily resected PDAC.

Predictors of Early Mortality After Surgical Resection of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma in the Era of Neoadjuvant Treatment

OBJECTIVES

Neoadjuvant treatments are increasingly used for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), yet some experience early mortality after resection. We sought to identify predictors of early mortality after PDAC resection and determine their interaction with neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective study of patients with PDAC resection from March 2011 to March 2014. We compared those who died within one year after surgery to those living beyond 1 year, and those who received neoadjuvant therapy to those taken directly to surgery. We used logistic regression to identify predictors of early mortality and determine their interaction with neoadjuvant therapy.

RESULTS

Of 191 patients who underwent resection, 59 (30.9%) died within 1 year and 79 (41.4%) received neoadjuvant therapy. Early mortality patients were older, with higher comorbidity, and more likely to have lymph node positivity. Patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were younger, with lower comorbidity, and more likely to have upfront unresectable disease. Predictors of early mortality included: higher comorbidity, poorly differentiated tumor grade, and lymph node positivity. We found that neoadjuvant therapy moderated the effects of comorbidity and lymph node positivity on early mortality risk.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified predictors of early mortality after PDAC resection and determined their interaction with neoadjuvant therapy.

Preoperative predictors for early recurrence of resectable pancreatic cancer

Background

The first-line treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) is surgical resection. However, our patients have often experienced early recurrence after curative resection for RPC, with desperately poor prognosis. Some reports indicated that minimally distant metastasis not detected at operation might cause early recurrence. The present study aimed to identify preoperative clinicopathological features of early recurrence after curative resection of RPC.

Methods

Ninety RPC patients who underwent curative resection between 2000 and 2014 at our institution were retrospectively analyzed.

Results

Of the 90 patients, 32 had recurrence within 1 year. Univariate analysis demonstrated that preoperative serum carbohydrate antigen (CA19-9) ≥529 U/mL (P = 0.0011), preoperative serum s-pancreas-1 antigen (SPan-1) ≥37 U/mL (P = 0.0038), and histological grades G2–G4 (P = 0.0158) were significantly associated with recurrence within 1 year after curative resection. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that preoperative serum CA19-9 ≥ 529 U/mL (P = 0.0477) and histological grade G2–G4 (P = 0.0129) were independent predictors of recurrence within 1 year. Recurrent cases within 1 year postoperatively had significantly more distant metastasis than cases with no recurrence within 1 year (P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Preoperative serum CA19-9 ≥ 529 U/mL and histological grades G2–G4 were independent predictive factors for recurrence within 1 year after pancreatectomy for RPC. Furthermore, recurrent cases within 1 year had more frequent distant metastasis than cases with no recurrence within 1 year. These results suggest that RPC patients with preoperative serum CA19-9 ≥ 529 U/mL should receive preoperative therapy rather than surgery.

Neoadjuvant Therapy Followed by Resection Versus Upfront Resection for Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis

Purpose To compare overall survival between patients who received neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) followed by resection and those who received upfront resection (UR)-as well as a subgroup of UR patients who also received adjuvant therapy-for early-stage resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Patients and Methods Adult patients with resected, clinical stage I or II adenocarcinoma of the head of the pancreas were identified in the National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2012. Patients who underwent NAT followed by curative-intent resection were matched by propensity score with patients whose tumors were resected upfront. Overall survival was compared by using a Cox proportional hazards regression model. Early postoperative and oncologic outcomes were evaluated. Results We identified 15,237 patients with clinical stage I or II resected pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. From the NAT group, 2,005 patients (95%) were matched with 6,015 patients who underwent UR. The NAT group was associated with improved survival compared with UR (median survival, 26 months v 21 months, respectively; stratified log-rank P < .01; hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.68 to 0.78). Patients in the UR group had higher pathologic T stage (pT3 and T4: 86% v 73%; P < .01), higher positive lymph nodes (73% v 48%; P < .01), and higher positive resection margin (24% v 17%; P < .01). Compared with a subset of UR patients who received adjuvant therapy, NAT patients had a better survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.89). Conclusion NAT followed by resection has a significant survival benefit compared with UR in early-stage, resected pancreatic head adenocarcinoma. These findings support the use of NAT, particularly as a patient selection tool, in the management of resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic cancer chemoradiotherapy

Pancreatic cancer is the most lethal gastrointestinal tumour. Chemotherapy is the mainstay of therapy in the majority of the patients whereas resection is the only chance of cure but only possible in 15-20% of all patients. The integration of radiotherapy into multimodal treatment concepts is heavily investigated. It is now commonly accepted that induction chemotherapy should precede radiotherapy. When fractionated conventionally it should be given as chemoradiotherapy. Recently, stereotactic body radiotherapy emerged as an alternative, but will have to be carefully investigated in clinical trials. This review aims to give an overview of radiotherapeutic strategies with a focus on the latest developments in the field in the context of chemotherapy and surgery.

Early Recurrence and Omission of Adjuvant Therapy after Pancreaticoduodenectomy Argue against a Surgery-First Approach

BACKGROUND

Sequencing therapy for patients with periampullary malignancy is controversial. Clinical trial data report high rates of adjuvant therapy completion, though contemporary, real-world rates remain incomplete. We sought to identify patients who failed to receive adjuvant therapy and those at risk for early recurrence (ER) who might benefit most from neoadjuvant therapy (NT).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed medical records of 201 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for periampullary malignancies between 1999 and 2015; patients receiving NT were excluded. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify predictors of failure to receive adjuvant therapy and ER (within 6 months) as the primary end points.

RESULTS

The median age at the time of surgery was 65.5 years (interquartile range 57-74 years). The majority of tumors were pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (76.6 %), and 71.6 % of patients received adjuvant therapy after resection. Univariate predictors of failure to undergo adjuvant therapy were advanced age, age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, operative transfusion, reoperation, length of stay, and 30- to 90-day readmissions (all p < 0.05). Advanced age, specifically among patients >70 years, persisted as a significant preoperative predictor on multivariate analysis (p < 0.01). Patients who failed to receive adjuvant therapy and/or developed ER had significantly worse overall survival rates compared to all other patients (27.8 vs. 9.7 months; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately one-third of surgery-first patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy at our institution did not receive adjuvant therapy and/or demonstrated ER. This substantial subset of patients may particularly benefit from NT, ensuring completion of multimodal therapy and/or avoiding futile surgical intervention.