CT in the prediction of margin-negative resection in pancreatic cancer following neoadjuvant treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Survival Outcomes According to NCCN Criteria for Resection Following Neoadjuvant Therapy for Patients with Localized Pancreatic Cancer

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the prognostic value of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) criteria for resection following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

This retrospective single-center study assessed 193 consecutive patients with localized PDAC (104 males and 89 females; mean age, 61.1 ± 9.4 years) who underwent neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery between January 2010 and March 2021. Combined resectability and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 evaluation before and after neoadjuvant therapy was used to determine whether patients were eligible for resection according to the NCCN criteria. Post-surgical overall survival (OS), recurrence free survival (RFS), and pathologic results were evaluated and compared between patients considered eligible according to the NCCN criteria and those considered ineligible. Preoperative factors associated with better OS and RFS also were investigated.

RESULTS

Of the 193 patients, 168 (87.0 %) were eligible for resection according to the NCCN criteria. The patients eligible according to the NCCN criteria showed marginally longer OS than those considered ineligible (p = 0.056). After adjustment of variables, meeting the NCCN criteria for resection was an independent predictor of better OS (hazard ratio, 0.57; 95 % confidence interval, 0.34-0.96; p = 0.034). The two groups had similar RFS. Lower T-staging (T2 or less) and less lympho-vascular invasion and peri-neural invasion were noted in the patients who met the NCCN criteria (p ≤ 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients eligible for resection according to the NCCN criteria showed a trend toward longer OS and better pathologic results than the patients considered ineligible.

Computed tomography-based vascular burden index as a predictor of vascular resection and pathological vascular invasion in pancreatic cancer with neo-adjuvant chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Determination of vessel resection in patients with pancreatectomy after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy remains controversial. The recently introduced computed tomography-based vascular burden index presents a potential solution to this challenge. This study aimed to evaluate the model performance for the prediction of vascular resection and pathological invasion.

METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy were included. Two independent reviewers measured the vascular tumour burden index around the adjacent artery (AVBI), and vein (VVBI). The area under the curve was compared to assess the predictive capacity of vascular burden index values and their changes for vascular resection and pathological vascular invasion.

RESULTS

Among 252 patients, 179 and 73 had borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer, respectively. Concurrent vessel resection and pathological vascular invasion were observed in 121 (48.0 %) and 42 (16.6 %) patients, respectively. In all patients, the VVBI (area under the curve: 0.872) and AVBI (0.911) after neo-adjuvant therapy significantly predicted vessel resection. In patients with vascular resection, the VVBI after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (0.752) and delta value of the AVBI (0.706) demonstrated better performance for predicting pathological invasion of the resected vein. The regression of the AVBI and VVBI was an independent prognostic factor for survival (hazard ratio: 0.54, 95 % confidence interval: 0.34-0.85; P = 0.009) CONCLUSIONS: Regressed VVBI on serial computed tomography scans is useful for predicting vein resection and pathological venous invasion before surgery. The delta value of the AVBI may therefore be helpful for predicting pathological arterial invasion after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.

Minimum and Optimal CA19-9 Response After Two Months Induction Chemotherapy in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer: A Nationwide Multicenter Study

OBJECTIVE

This nationwide multicenter study aimed to define clinically relevant thresholds of relative serum CA19-9 response after 2 months of induction chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC).

BACKGROUND

CA19-9 is seen as leading biomarker for response evaluation in patients with LAPC, but early clinically useful cut-offs are lacking.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with LAPC after 4 cycles (m)FOLFIRINOX or 2 cycles gemcitabine-nab-paclitaxel induction chemotherapy (±radiotherapy) with CA19-9 ≥5 U/mL at baseline were analyzed (2015-2019). The association of CA19-9 response with median OS (mOS) was evaluated for different CA19-9 cut-off points. Minimum and optimal CA19-9 response were established via log-rank test. Predictors for OS were analyzed using COX regression analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 212 patients were included, of whom 42 (19.8%) underwent resection. Minimum CA19-9 response demonstrating a clinically significant median OS difference (12.7 vs. 19.6 months) was seen at ≥40% CA19-9 decrease. The optimal cutoff for CA19-9 response was ≥60% decrease (21.7 vs. 14.0 mo, P =0.021). Only for patients with elevated CA19-9 levels at baseline (n=184), CA19-9 decrease ≥60% [hazard ratio (HR)=0.59, 95% CI, 0.36-0.98, P =0.042] was independently associated with prolonged OS, as were SBRT (HR=0.42, 95% CI, 0.25-0.70; P =0.001), and resection (HR=0.25, 95% CI, 0.14-0.46, P <0.001), and duration of chemotherapy (HR=0.75, 95% CI, 0.69-0.82, P <0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

CA19-9 decrease of ≥60% following induction chemotherapy as optimal response cut-off in patients with LAPC is an independent predictor for OS when CA19-9 is increased at baseline. Furthermore, ≥40% is the minimum cut-off demonstrating survival benefit. These cut-offs may be used when discussing treatment strategies during early response evaluation.

Serum CEA as a Prognostic Marker for Overall Survival in Patients with Localized Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma and Non-Elevated CA19-9 Levels Treated with FOLFIRINOX as Initial Treatment: A TAPS Consortium Study

INTRODUCTION

About 25% of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma have non-elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 levels at baseline, hampering evaluation of response to preoperative treatment. Serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) is a potential alternative.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study from five referral centers included consecutive patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (2012-2019), treated with one or more cycles of (m)FOLFIRINOX, and non-elevated CA19-9 levels (i.e., < 37 U/mL) at baseline. Cox regression analyses were performed to assess prognostic factors for overall survival (OS), including CEA level at baseline, restaging, and dynamics.

RESULTS

Overall, 277 patients were included in this study. CEA at baseline was elevated (≥5 ng/mL) in 53 patients (33%) and normalized following preoperative therapy in 14 patients (26%). In patients with elevated CEA at baseline, median OS in patients with CEA normalization following preoperative therapy was 33 months versus 19 months in patients without CEA normalization (p = 0.088). At time of baseline, only elevated CEA was independently associated with (worse) OS (hazard ratio [HR] 1.44, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.98). At time of restaging, elevated CEA at baseline was still the only independent predictor for (worse) OS (HR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04-1.98), whereas elevated CEA at restaging (HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.77-1.77) was not.

CONCLUSIONS

Serum CEA was elevated in one-third of patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma having non-elevated CA19-9 at baseline. At both time of baseline and time of restaging, elevated serum CEA measured at baseline was the only predictor for (worse) OS. Therefore, serum CEA may be a useful tool for decision making at both initial staging and time of restaging in patients with non-elevated CA19-9.

Preoperative chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgical decision-making in patients with borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer

Surgical resection combined with systemic chemotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. Upfront surgery is considered suboptimal in cases with extensive vascular involvement, which can be classified as either borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In these patients, FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel chemotherapy is currently used as preoperative chemotherapy and is eventually combined with radiotherapy. Thus, more patients might reach 5-year overall survival. Patient selection for chemotherapy, radiotherapy and subsequent surgery is based on anatomical, biological and conditional parameters. Current guidelines and clinical practices vary considerably regarding preoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy, response evaluation, and indications for surgery. In this Review, we provide an overview of the clinical evidence regarding disease staging, preoperative therapy, response evaluation and surgery in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer or locally advanced pancreatic cancer. In addition, a clinical work-up is proposed based on the available evidence and guidelines. We identify knowledge gaps and outline a proposed research agenda.

Advances in the management of pancreatic cancer

Pancreatic cancer remains among the malignancies with the worst outcomes. Survival has been improving, but at a slower rate than other cancers. Multimodal treatment, including chemotherapy, surgical resection, and radiotherapy, has been under investigation for many years. Because of the anatomical characteristics of the pancreas, more emphasis on treatment selection has been placed on local extension into major vessels. Recently, the development of more effective treatment regimens has opened up new treatment strategies, but urgent research questions have also become apparent. This review outlines the current management of pancreatic cancer, and the recent advances in its treatment. The review discusses future treatment pathways aimed at integrating novel findings of translational and clinical research.

Currently Debated Topics on Surgical Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Narrative Review on Surgical Treatment of Borderline Resectable, Locally Advanced, and Synchronous or Metachronous Oligometastatic Tumor

BACKGROUND

Previously considered inoperable patients (borderline resectable, locally advanced, synchronous oligometastatic or metachronous pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC)) are starting to become resectable thanks to advances in chemo/radiotherapy and the reduction in operative mortality.

METHODS

This narrative review presents a chosen literature selection, giving a picture of the current state of treatment of these patients.

RESULTS

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is generally recognized as the treatment of choice before surgery. However, despite the increased efficacy, the best pathological response is still limited to 10.9-27.9% of patients. There are still limited data on the selection of possible NAT responders and how to diagnose non-responders early. Multidetector computed tomography has high sensitivity and low specificity in evaluating resectability after NAT, limiting the resection rate of resectable patients. Ca 19-9 and Positron emission tomography are giving promising results. The prediction of early recurrence after a radical resection of synchronous or metachronous metastatic PDAC, thus identifying patients with poor prognosis and saving them from a resection of little benefit, is still ongoing, although some promising data are available.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, high-level evidence demonstrating the benefit of the surgical treatment of such patients is still lacking and should not be performed outside of high-volume centers with interdisciplinary teams of surgeons and oncologists.

Post-neoadjuvant treatment pancreatic cancer resectability and outcome prediction using CT, 18F-FDG PET/MRI and CA 19-9

BACKGROUND

CT prediction of resectability and prognosis following neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains challenging. This study aims to determine whether addition of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) postiron emission tomography (PET)/MRI and carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9 to contrast-enhanced CT (CECT) can improve accuracy of predicting resectability compared to CECT alone and predict prognosis in PDAC patients after NAT.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 120 PDAC patients (65 women; mean age, 66.7 years [standard deviation, 8.4]) underwent CECT, PET/MRI, and CA 19-9 examinations after NAT between January 2013 and June 2021. Three board-certified radiologists independently rated the overall resectability on a 5-point scale (score 5, definitely resectable) in three sessions (session 1, CECT; 2, CECT plus PET/MRI─no FDG avidity and no diffusion restriction at tumor-vessel contact indicated modification of CECT scores to ≥ 3; 3, CECT plus PET plus CA 19-9─no FDG avidity at tumor-vessel contact and normalized CA 19-9 indicated modification of CECT scores to ≥ 3). Jackknife free-response receiver operating characteristic method and generalized estimating equations were used to compare pooled area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, and specificity of three sessions. Predictors for recurrence-free survival (RFS) were assessed using Cox regression analyses.

RESULTS

Each session showed different pooled AUC (session 1 vs. 2 vs. 3, 0.853 vs. 0.873 vs. 0.874, p = 0.026), sensitivity (66.2% [137/207] vs. 86.0% [178/207] vs. 84.5% [175/207], p < 0.001) and specificity (67.3% [103/153] vs. 58.8% [90/153] vs. 60.1% [92/153], p = 0.048). According to pairwise comparison, specificity of CECT plus PET/MRI was lower than that of CECT alone (adjusted p = 0.042), while there was no significant difference in specificity between CECT alone and CECT plus PET plus CA 19-9 (adjusted p = 0.081). Twenty-eight of 69 patients (40.6%) with R0 resection experienced tumor recurrence (mean follow-up, 18.0 months). FDG avidity at tumor-vessel contact on post-NAT PET (HR = 4.37, p = 0.033) and pathologically confirmed vascular invasion (HR = 5.36, p = 0.004) predicted RFS.

CONCLUSION

Combination of CECT, PET and CA 19-9 increased area under the curve and sensitivity for determining resectability, compared to CECT alone, without compromising the specificity. Furthermore, ¹⁸F-FDG avidity at tumor-vessel contact on post-NAT PET predicted RFS.

Technical Implications for Surgical Resection in Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma remains a global health challenge and is predicted to soon become the second leading cause of cancer death in developed countries. Currently, surgical resection in combination with systemic chemotherapy offers the only chance of cure or long-term survival. However, only 20% of cases are diagnosed with anatomically resectable disease. Neoadjuvant treatment followed by highly complex surgical procedures has been studied over the last decade with promising short- and long-term results in patients with locally advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (LAPC). In recent years, a wide variety of complex surgical techniques that involve extended pancreatectomies, including portomesenteric venous resection, arterial resection, or multi-organ resection, have emerged to optimize local control of the disease and improve postoperative outcomes. Although there are multiple surgical techniques described in the literature to improve outcomes in LAPC, the comprehensive view of these strategies remains underdeveloped. We aim to describe the preoperative surgical planning as well different surgical resections strategies in LAPC after neoadjuvant treatment in an integrated way for selected patients with no other potentially curative option other than surgery.

Added value of 3T MRI and the MRI-halo sign in assessing resectability of locally advanced pancreatic cancer following induction chemotherapy (IMAGE-MRI): prospective pilot study

BACKGROUND

Restaging of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) after induction chemotherapy using contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CE-CT) imaging is imprecise in evaluating local tumor response. This study explored the value of 3 Tesla (3 T) contrast-enhanced (CE) and diffusion-weighted (DWI) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for local tumor restaging.

METHODS

This is a prospective pilot study including 20 consecutive patients with LAPC with RECIST non-progressive disease on CE-CT after induction chemotherapy. Restaging CE-CT, CE-MRI, and DWI-MRI were retrospectively evaluated by two abdominal radiologists in consensus, scoring tumor size and vascular involvement. A halo sign was defined as replacement of solid perivascular (arterial and venous) tumor tissue by a zone of fatty-like signal intensity.

RESULTS

Adequate MRI was obtained in 19 patients with LAPC after induction chemotherapy. Tumor diameter was non-significantly smaller on CE-MRI compared to CE-CT (26 mm vs. 30 mm; p = 0.073). An MRI-halo sign was seen on CE-MRI in 52.6% (n = 10/19), whereas a CT-halo sign was seen in 10.5% (n = 2/19) of patients (p = 0.016). An MRI-halo sign was not associated with resection rate (60.0% vs. 62.5%; p = 1.000). In the resection cohort, patients with an MRI-halo sign had a non-significant increased R0 resection rate as compared to patients without an MRI-halo sign (66.7% vs. 20.0%; p = 0.242). Positive and negative predictive values of the CE-MRI-halo sign for R0 resection were 66.7% and 66.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

3 T CE-MRI and the MRI-halo sign might be helpful to assess the effect of induction chemotherapy in patients with LAPC, but its diagnostic accuracy has to be evaluated in larger series.

Resectability Status of Pancreatic Cancer Having Tumor Contact with an Aberrant Right Hepatic Artery: Is Upfront Surgery Justified?

BACKGROUND

The NCCN guidelines define pancreatic cancer that has contact with an aberrant right hepatic artery (A-RHA) as a borderline-resectable tumor. However, the impact of tumor contact with an A-RHA on surgical and survival outcomes has not been well discussed.

METHODS

A total of 541 patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for resectable and borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer between 2002 and 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. The presence of an A-RHA and tumor contact with an A-RHA were evaluated based on the preoperative computed tomography findings. Patients with resectable tumors and tumors with A-RHA-contact (having contact with an A-RHA without involvement of the major arteries) were generally treated by upfront surgery, whereas those with borderline-resectable tumors generally underwent neoadjuvant therapy and subsequent resection.

RESULTS

Among the 541 patients, 116 (21.4%) had an A-RHA and 15 (2.8%) had tumor with A-RHA-contact. The A-RHA was resected in 12, and arterial reconstruction was performed in 8. The rates of morbidity and R1 resection in patients with an A-RHA (32.8 and 10.3%, respectively) were comparable to those without an A-RHA (27.3 and 11.3%, respectively). The overall survival in patients with A-RHA-contact was significantly worse than that in patients with borderline-resectable tumors (median survival time, 14.6 vs. 35.3 months, p = 0.048).

CONCLUSIONS

Although upfront resection was safely performed and led to a high R0 resection rate in patients with A-RHA-contact, the survival outcome was dismal. A tumor with A-RHA-contact should be regarded as technically resectable but oncologically borderline-resectable. Upfront surgery may not be appropriate for patients with A-RHA-contact.

Is Cell-Free DNA Testing in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Ready for Prime Time?

Cell-free DNA (cfDNA) testing currently does not have a significant role in PDA management: it is insufficient to diagnose PDA, and its use is primarily restricted to identifying targetable mutations (if tissue is insufficient or unavailable). cfDNA testing has the potential to address critical needs in PDA management, such as pre-operative risk stratification (POR), prognostication, and predicting (and monitoring) treatment response. Prior studies have focused primarily on somatic mutations, specifically KRAS variants, and have shown limited success in addressing prognosis and POR. Recent studies have demonstrated the importance of other less prevalent mutations (ERBB2 and TP53), but no studies have provided reliable mutation panels for clinical use. Methylation aberrations in cfDNA (epigenetic markers) in PDA have been relatively less explored. However, early evidence has suggested they offer diagnostic and, to some extent, prognostic value. The inclusion of epigenetic markers of cfDNA adds another dimension to genomic testing and may open new therapeutic avenues beyond addressing critical areas of need in PDA treatment. For cfDNA to substantially influence PDA management, concerted efforts are required to include less frequent mutations and epigenetic markers. Furthermore, relying on KRAS mutations for PDA management will always be inadequate.

Prediction of Margin-Negative Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Following Neoadjuvant Therapy: Diagnostic Performance of NCCN Criteria for Resection vs. CT-Determined Resectability

BACKGROUND

Accurate assessment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) resectability after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is crucial. Recently, the NCCN introduced criteria for resection of PDAC following NAT.

METHODS

We analyzed 127 patients who underwent NAT and pancreatectomy for PDAC between January 2010 and March 2020. CT-determined resectability according to the NCCN guideline, and CA 19-9 level was evaluated before and after NAT. Diagnostic performance of the NCCN criteria for margin-negative (R0) resection was investigated and compared with CT alone.

RESULTS

R0 resection was achieved in 104 (81.9%) patients. After NAT, there were 30 (23.6%) resectable, 90 (70.9%) borderline resectable, and seven (5.5%) locally advanced tumors. Significantly decreased or stable CA 19-9 levels were noted in 114 (89.8%) patients. The sensitivity and specificity of the NCCN criteria were 87.5% (91/104) and 21.7% (5/23), respectively, which were significantly different from CT including only resectable PDAC (26.9% [28/104] and 91.3% [21/23]; p<0.001), but less prominently different from CT including resectable and borderline resectable PDAC (95.2% [99/104]; p=0.022 and 8.7% [2/23]; p=0.375).

CONCLUSIONS

The NCCN criteria for resection following NAT showed high sensitivity and low specificity for predicting R0 resection. It had supplementary benefit over CT alone, mainly in preventing underestimation of R0 resection.

Tumor resectability and response on CT following neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer: inter-observer agreement study

OBJECTIVES

First, to measure inter-observer agreement regarding tumor resectability and response, and second, to measure diagnostic performance in predicting negative resection margin, on re-staging CTs of patients who received neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who received neoadjuvant therapy for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer from 2017 to 2020. Six readers independently evaluated initial staging and re-staging CT images. They categorized the resectability on re-staging CT based on the NCCN guideline, and evaluated tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy according to our proposed criteria on a 5-grade scale. For inter-observer agreement, Gwet's agreement coefficients were used. A crossed random effect model was used to pool the sensitivity and specificity of six readers in predicting negative resection margin.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients with the median age of 66 (59-70) were included. The pooled agreement for tumor resectability was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.56-0.71) for differentiating the three categories, and 0.84 (0.77-0.91) for differentiating resectable or borderline resectable cancer vs. unresectable cancer. Agreement for tumor response grade was 0.89 (0.85-0.92). The pooled sensitivity and specificity for predicting negative resection margin were 48% (43-52%) and 61% (57-64%), respectively, when only "resectable" on re-staging CT was considered as index test positive. When either "resectable"' or "borderline resectable" was considered as positive, the pooled sensitivity and specificity were 91% (89-94%) and 5% (4-6%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

CT can be used reliably with a high inter-observer agreement in selecting candidates for surgery after neoadjuvant therapy of pancreatic cancer.

KEY POINTS

• On CT following neoadjuvant therapy of pancreatic cancer, six readers showed high agreement in differentiating resectable or borderline resectable vs. unresectable cancer (Gwet's coefficient, 0.84). • Inter-observer agreement was also high for our proposed tumor response grade (Gwet's coefficient, 0.89). • Specificity was very low (5%) while sensitivity was high (91%) when either resectable or borderline resectable cancer on re-staging CT was considered as predictive of negative resection margin status.

Application of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Neoadjuvant Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the deadliest malignant tumors of the human digestive system. Due to its insidious onset, many patients have already lost the opportunity for radical resection upon tumor diagnosis. In recent years, neoadjuvant treatment for patients with borderline resectable PDAC has been recommended by multiple guidelines to increase the resection rate of radical surgery and improve the postoperative survival. However, further developments are required to accurately assess the tumor response to neoadjuvant therapy and to select the population suitable for such treatment. Reductions in drug toxicity and the number of neoadjuvant cycles are also critical. At present, the clinical evaluation of neoadjuvant treatment is mainly based on several serological and imaging indicators; however, the unique characteristics of PDAC and the insufficient sensitivity and specificity of the markers render this system ineffective. The imaging evaluation system, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), has its own unique imaging advantages compared with computed tomography (CT) and other imaging examinations. One key advantage is the ability to reflect the changes more rapidly in tumor tissue components, such as the degree of fibrosis, microvessel density, and tissue hypoxia. It can also perform multiparameter quantitative analysis of tumor tissue and changes, attributing to its increasingly important role in imaging evaluation, and potentially the evaluation of neoadjuvant treatment of pancreatic cancer, as several current articles have studied. At the same time, owing to the complexity of MRI and some of its limitations, its wider application is limited. Compared with CT imaging, few relevant studies have been conducted. In this review article, we will investigate and summarize the advantages, limitations, and future development of MRI in the evaluation of neoadjuvant treatment of PDAC. EVIDENCE LEVEL: 3 TECHNICAL EFFICACY: Stage 2.

Neoadjuvant Treatment for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: A False Promise or an Opportunity to Improve Outcome?

Simple Summary

Pancreatic cancer usually presents late when it has spread to distant sites. In a small proportion of patients, the cancer can be removed by surgery. Surgery is usually followed by chemotherapy, as studies have shown that this improves survival. However, due to complications after surgery and a decline in fitness, some patients do not start their chemotherapy and many do not complete the planned course. The cancer returns in the majority of patients. Chemotherapy or a combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy before surgery are being investigated to improve survival. The best treatment regime and patient selection for different treatment strategies remains to be defined and is discussed here.

Abstract

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has an aggressive tumor biology and is associated with poor survival outcomes. Most patients present with metastatic or locally advanced disease. In the 10–20% of patients with upfront resectable disease, surgery offers the only chance of cure, with the addition of adjuvant chemotherapy representing an established standard of care for improving outcomes. Despite resection followed by adjuvant chemotherapy, at best, 3-year survival reaches 63.4%. Post-operative complications and poor performance mean that around 50% of the patients do not commence adjuvant chemotherapy, and a significant proportion do not complete the intended treatment course. These factors, along with the advantages of early treatment of micrometastatic disease, the ability to downstage tumors, and the increase in R0 resection rates, have increased interest in neo-adjuvant treatment strategies. Here we review biomarkers for early diagnosis of PDAC and patient selection for a neo-adjuvant approach. We also review the current evidence for different chemotherapy regimens in this setting, as well as the role of chemoradiotherapy and immunotherapy, and we discuss ongoing trials.

CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is a more reliable prognostic factor for survival than pathology-diagnosed extension

OBJECTIVES

To determine the correlation between CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension, and survival in patients with PDAC.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 87 patients with resected PDAC. Two radiologists evaluated negative ((i) tumours surrounded by the pancreatic parenchyma and (ii) tumours contacting the pancreatic surface) or positive ((iii) tumours with peri-pancreatic strand appearances and/or with expansive growth) CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension. Clinical, pathological, and CT imaging characteristics predicting disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Cox proportional-hazards models. Diagnostic accuracy for pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was also assessed.

RESULTS

CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension (42/87 tumours, 48.3%; κ = 0.82) had a higher hazard ratio (HR) for the DFS (HR, 5.30; p < 0.01) and OS (HR, 5.31; p < 0.01) rates than pathology-diagnosed extension in univariable analyses. It was also an independent prognostic factor for the DFS (HR, 4.22; p < 0.01) and OS (HR, 4.38; p < 0.01) rates in multivariable analyses. Of 45 tumours without CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension, pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was observed in 2/8 (25.0%) and 32/37 (86.5%) tumours with CT categories (i) and (ii), respectively. However, the differences in the survival rates between patients with CT categories (i) and (ii) were insignificant, although those in the latter category had significantly better survival rates than those with CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension (category (iii)).

CONCLUSIONS

CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was a better prognostic factor than pathology-diagnosed extension and considered an independent factor for the postoperative DFS and OS rates with reasonable frequency and high reproducibility, despite the low diagnostic accuracy for predicting pathology-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension.

KEY POINTS

• A CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension had a higher hazard ratio for both disease-free survival and overall survival compared to pathology-diagnosed extension in univariable survival analyses. • A CT-diagnosed extra-pancreatic extension was a significant independent predictor of both disease-free survival and overall survival, as observed in multivariable survival analyses. • Patients with tumours contacting with the pancreatic surface on CT images (CT category (ii)) showed similar survival rates to those whose tumours were surrounded by the pancreatic parenchyma (CT category (i)), although many tumours with CT category (ii) extended pathologically beyond the pancreas.