A pancreatic cancer multidisciplinary clinic: insights and outcomes

Variation in outcomes and practice patterns among patients with localized pancreatic cancer: the impact of the pancreatic cancer multidisciplinary clinic

Introduction

Patients with localized pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) benefit from multi-modality therapy. Whether care patterns and oncologic outcomes vary if a patient was seen through a pancreatic multi-disciplinary clinic (PMDC) versus only individual specialty clinics is unclear.

Methods

Using institutional Pancreatic Cancer Registry, we identified patients with localized PDAC from 2019- 2022 who eventually underwent resection. It was our standard practice for borderline resectable (BRPC) patients to undergo ≤4 months of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, ± radiation, followed by exploration, while locally advanced (LAPC) patients were treated with 4-6 months of chemotherapy, followed by radiation and potential exploration. Descriptive and multivariable analyses (MVA) were performed to examine the association between clinic type (PMDC vs individual specialty clinics i.e. surgical oncology, medical oncology, or radiation oncology) and study outcomes.

Results

A total of 416 patients met inclusion criteria. Of these, 267 (64.2%) had PMDC visits. PMDC group received radiation therapy more commonly (53.9% versus 27.5%, p=0.001), as compared to individual specialty clinic group. Completion of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) was far more frequent in patients seen through PMDC compared to patients seen through individual specialty clinics (69.3% vs 48.9%). On MVA, PMDC group was significantly associated with receipt of NAT per institutional standards (adjusted OR 2.23, 95% CI 1.46-7.07, p=0.006). Moreover, the average treatment effect of PMDC on progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.45 (95CI: 0.87-8.03) months. No significant association between overall survival (OS) and clinic type was observed.

Discussion

Provision of care through PMDC was associated with significantly higher odds of completing NAT per institutional standards as compared to individual specialty clinics, which possibly translated into improved PFS. The development of multidisciplinary clinics for management of pancreatic cancer should be incentivized, and any barriers to such development should be addressed.

Impact of an Inter-Professional Clinic on Pancreatic Cancer Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) presents significant challenges in diagnosis, staging, and appropriate treatment. Furthermore, patients with PDAC often experience complex symptomatology and psychosocial implications that require multi-disciplinary and inter-professional supportive care management from health professionals. Despite these hurdles, the implementation of inter-professional clinic approaches showed promise in enhancing clinical outcomes. To assess the effectiveness of such an approach, we examined the impact of the Wallace McCain Centre for Pancreatic Cancer (WMCPC), an inter-professional clinic for patients with PDAC at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (PM). Methods: This retrospective cohort study included all patients diagnosed with PDAC who were seen at the PM before (July 2012-June 2014) and after (July 2014-June 2016) the establishment of the WMCPC. Standard therapies such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy remained consistent across both time periods. The cohorts were compared in terms of survival rates, disease stage, referral patterns, time to treatment, symptoms, and the proportion of patients assessed and supported by nursing and allied health professionals. Results: A total of 993 patients were included in the review, comprising 482 patients pre-WMCPC and 511 patients post-WMCPC. In the multivariate analysis, adjusting for ECOG (Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group) and stage, it was found that post-WMCPC patients experienced longer median overall survival (mOS, HR 0.84, 95% CI 0.72-0.98, p = 0.023). Furthermore, the time from referral to initial consultation date decreased significantly from 13.4 to 8.8 days in the post-WMCPC cohort (p < 0.001), along with a reduction in the time from the first clinic appointment to biopsy (14 vs. 8 days, p = 0.022). Additionally, patient-reported well-being scores showed improvement in the post-WMCPC cohort (p = 0.02), and these patients were more frequently attended to by nursing and allied health professionals (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The implementation of an inter-professional clinic for patients diagnosed with PDAC led to improvements in overall survival, patient-reported well-being, time to initial assessment visit and pathological diagnosis, and symptom management. These findings advocate for the adoption of an inter-professional clinic model in the treatment of patients with PDAC.

The impact of multidisciplinary cancer conferences on overall survival: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Multidisciplinary cancer conferences consist of regular meetings between diverse specialists working together to share clinical decision making in cancer care. The aim of this study was to systematically review and meta-analyze the effect of multidisciplinary cancer conference intervention on the overall survival of patients with cancer.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Controlled Register of Trials for studies published up to July 2023. Studies reporting on the impact of multidisciplinary cancer conferences on patient overall survival were included. A standard random-effects model with the inverse variance-weighted approach was used to estimate the pooled hazard ratio of mortality (multidisciplinary cancer conference vs non-multidisciplinary cancer conference) across studies, and the heterogeneity was assessed by I2. Publication bias was examined using funnel plots and the Egger test.

RESULTS

A total of 134 287 patients with cancer from 59 studies were included in our analysis, with 48 467 managed by multidisciplinary cancer conferences and 85 820 in the control arm. Across all cancer types, patients managed by multidisciplinary cancer conferences had an increased overall survival compared with control patients (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% confidence interval = 0.62 to 0.71, I2 = 84%). Median survival time was 30.2 months in the multidisciplinary cancer conference group and 19.0 months in the control group. In subgroup analysis, a positive effect of the multidisciplinary cancer conference intervention on overall survival was found in breast, colorectal, esophageal, hematologic, hepatocellular, lung, pancreatic, and head and neck cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, our meta-analysis found a significant positive effect of multidisciplinary cancer conferences compared with controls. Further studies are needed to establish nuanced guidelines when optimizing multidisciplinary cancer conference integration for treating diverse patient populations.

Pancreatic Cancer Multidisciplinary Clinic is Associated with Improved Treatment and Elimination of Socioeconomic Disparities

OBJECTIVE

To identify the association between multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) management and disparities in treatment for patients with pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status (SES) predicts treatment and survival for pancreatic cancer. Multidisciplinary clinics (MDCs) may improve surgical management for these patients.

METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study (2010-2018) of all pancreatic cancer patients within a large, regional hospital system with a high-volume pancreatic cancer MDC. The primary outcome was receipt of treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, clinical trial participation, and palliative care); the secondary outcomes were overall survival and MDC management. Multiple logistic regressions were used for binary outcomes. Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, Cox proportional hazards, and inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW).

RESULTS

Of the 4141 patients studied, 1420 (34.3%) were managed by the MDC. MDC management was more likely for patients who were younger age, married, and privately insured, while less likely for low SES patients (all p < 0.05). MDC patients were more likely to receive all treatments, including neoadjuvant chemotherapy (OR 3.33, 95% CI 2.82-3.93), surgery (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.15-1.68), palliative care (OR 1.21, 95% CI 1.05-1.38), and clinical trial participation (OR 3.76, 95% CI 2.86-4.93). Low SES patients were less likely to undergo surgery outside of the MDC (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31-0.73) but there was no difference within the MDC (OR 1.10, 95% CI 0.68-1.77). Across multiple survival analyses, low SES predicted inferior survival outside of the MDC, but there was no association among MDC patients.

CONCLUSION

Multidisciplinary team-based care increases rates of treatment and eliminates socioeconomic disparities for pancreatic cancer patients.

Facility type is associated with improved perioperative and oncologic outcomes after minimally invasive surgery for pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

This study sought to evaluate outcome differences by facility type in patients who underwent minimally invasive surgery (MIS) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with clinical stage I-III PDAC who underwent MIS from 2010 to 2019 in academic or community facilities.

RESULTS

Of 6806 patients who fulfilled inclusion criteria; 1788 (26.3%) were treated at community facilities and 5018 (74.7%) at academic facilities. Patients treated at academic facilities were more likely to receive care at a high-volume facility (62% vs. 32%, p < 0.001), undergo a Whipple (64% vs. 61%, p < 0.001), and be clinical stage II (42% vs. 38%) and III (5.6% vs. 4.9%, p = 0.001). Treatment at academic facilities was predictive of receiving neoadjuvant therapy (OR 2.08, p < 0.001), negative margin resection (OR 0.80, p = 0.004), lower 90-day mortality (OR 0.72, p = 0.02), decreased length of stay (IRR 0.96, p < 0.001), and longer OS (HR 0.88, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent MIS for PDAC at academic facilities experienced an association with improved perioperative and oncologic outcomes than those treated in community facilities.

Fragmentation of Care in Pancreatic Cancer: Effects on Receipt of Care and Survival

BACKGROUND

The impact of fragmentation of care (FC), i.e., receipt of care at > 1 institution, on treatment of pancreatic cancer is unknown. The purpose of this study was to determine factors associated with FC in curative-intent treatment of pancreatic cancer (PDAC) patients and evaluate how FC affects survival outcomes.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database (NCDB), data on stage I-III PDAC patients diagnosed 2006-2016 were extracted. Multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors predictive of FC and survival.

RESULTS

Of the 20,013 patients identified, 24.1% had FC. Factors predictive of FC were stage-III tumors (odds ratio [OR] 1.36; p = 0.014), higher median-income [third quartile (OR 1.38; p = 0.006) and highest-quartile (OR 1.50; p = 0.003)], care at high-volume facility (OR 1.47; p < 0.001), and receipt of multi-modal therapy (OR 1.69; p < 0.001). In contrast, age > 80 years (OR 0.82; p = 0.018), Black (OR 0.85; p = 0.013) or Asian race (OR 0.76; p = 0.033), Charlson comorbidity-index 2 (OR 0.85; p = 0.033), treatment at non-academic facility (OR 0.87; p = 0.041), and non-private insurance were negatively predictive of FC. FC independently predicted decreased 30-day [OR 0.57; p < 0.001] and 90-day mortality [OR 0.61; p < 0.001] and improved overall survival [hazard ratio 0.91; p < 0.001].

DISCUSSION

Sociodemographic factors are significantly associated with FC in curative-intent treatment of PDAC patients. FC was found to predict improved 30-day, 90-day, and overall survival outcomes.

Impact of comprehensive family history and genetic analysis in the multidisciplinary pancreatic tumor clinic setting

BACKGROUND

Genetic testing is recommended for all pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Prior research demonstrates that multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer clinics (MDPCs) improve treatment- and survival-related outcomes for PDAC patients. However, limited information exists regarding the utility of integrated genetics in the MDPC setting. We hypothesized that incorporating genetics in an MDPC serving both PDAC patients and high-risk individuals (HRI) could: (1) improve compliance with guideline-based genetic testing for PDAC patients, and (2) optimize HRI identification and PDAC surveillance participation to improve early detection and survival.

METHODS

Demographics, genetic testing results, and pedigrees were reviewed for PDAC patients and HRI at one institution over 45 months. Genetic testing analyzed 16 PDAC-associated genes at minimum.

RESULTS

Overall, 969 MDPC subjects were evaluated during the study period; another 56 PDAC patients were seen outside the MDPC. Among 425 MDPC PDAC patients, 333 (78.4%) completed genetic testing; 29 (8.7%) carried a PDAC-related pathogenic germline variant (PGV). Additionally, 32 (9.6%) met familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) criteria. These PDAC patients had 191 relatives eligible for surveillance or genetic testing. Only 2/56 (3.6%) non-MDPC PDAC patients completed genetic testing (p < 0.01). Among 544 HRI, 253 (46.5%) had a known PGV or a designation of FPC, and were eligible for surveillance at baseline; of the remainder, 15/291 (5.2%) were eligible following genetic testing and PGV identification.

CONCLUSION

Integrating genetics into the multidisciplinary setting significantly improved genetic testing compliance by reducing logistical barriers for PDAC patients, and clarified cancer risks for their relatives while conserving clinical resources. Overall, we identified 206 individuals newly eligible for surveillance or genetic testing (191 relatives of MDPC PDAC patients, and 15 HRI from this cohort), enabling continuity of care for PDAC patients and at-risk relatives in one clinic.

Tumor Size Differences Between Preoperative Endoscopic Ultrasound and Postoperative Pathology for Neoadjuvant-Treated Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Predict Patient Outcome

BACKGROUND & AIMS

The assessment of therapeutic response after neoadjuvant treatment and pancreatectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has been an ongoing challenge. Several limitations have been encountered when employing current grading systems for residual tumor. Considering endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) represents a sensitive imaging technique for PDAC, differences in tumor size between preoperative EUS and postoperative pathology after neoadjuvant therapy were hypothesized to represent an improved marker of treatment response.

METHODS

For 340 treatment-naïve and 365 neoadjuvant-treated PDACs, EUS and pathologic findings were analyzed and correlated with patient overall survival (OS). A separate group of 200 neoadjuvant-treated PDACs served as a validation cohort for further analysis.

RESULTS

Among treatment-naïve PDACs, there was a moderate concordance between EUS imaging and postoperative pathology for tumor size (r = 0.726, P < .001) and AJCC 8th edition T-stage (r = 0.586, P < .001). In the setting of neoadjuvant therapy, a decrease in T-stage correlated with improved 3-year OS rates (50% vs 31%, P < .001). Through recursive partitioning, a cutoff of ≥47% tumor size reduction was also found to be associated with improved OS (67% vs 32%, P < .001). Improved OS using a ≥47% threshold was validated using a separate cohort of neoadjuvant-treated PDACs (72% vs 36%, P < .001). By multivariate analysis, a reduction in tumor size by ≥47% was an independent prognostic factor for improved OS (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

The difference in tumor size between preoperative EUS imaging and postoperative pathology among neoadjuvant-treated PDAC patients is an important prognostic indicator and may guide subsequent chemotherapeutic management.

Impact of multidisciplinary approach and radiologic review on surgical outcome and overall survival of patients with pancreatic cancer: a retrospective cohort study

AIM

To evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary team case discussion including computed tomography (CT) radiologic review on surgical outcome and overall survival (OS) of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC).

METHODS

Patients with PDAC evaluated in 2008-2011 and 2013-2016 (before and after multidisciplinary team introduction), aged <85 years and staged I-III, were included. Surgical failures and 2-year OS were compared in these periods. Available CT scans of preintervention period (2008-2011) cases were reviewed by two radiologists in consensus, assigning a resectability judgment to evaluate in how many cases a different recommendation would be achieved.

RESULTS

A total of 316 patients (49.3% female, age 71±10 years) were included: 132 in 2008-2011 and 184 in 2013-2016. The proportion of patients who underwent upfront surgery was similar in the two periods (51% vs 47% in 2008-2011 vs 2013-2016). Neoadjuvant referral increased from 7% to 21% and surgical resection was excluded for 42% patients in 2008-2011 vs 33% in 2013-2016 (p = 0.002). Adjusting by age, sex, and stage, surgical failures slightly decreased in 2013-2016 (odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.53-1.51); the decrease was stronger when therapeutic choice complied with CT indications (odds ratio 0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.36-1.63); in both cases, the decrease could be due to chance. After correction for age, sex, and stage, the hazard ratio of 2013-2016 for OS was 0.83 (95% confidence interval 0.64-1.09). In 33/114 (29%) patients, CT retrospective review produced a change in resectability judgment.

CONCLUSION

Although differences could be due to chance or generic improvement, the consistency between process and outcome indicators suggests that multidisciplinary team approach with radiologic review may improve outcomes.

A Pancreatic Cancer Multidisciplinary Clinic Eliminates Socioeconomic Disparities in Treatment and Improves Survival

AIMS

National studies have demonstrated disparities in the treatment and survival of pancreatic cancer patients based on socioeconomic status (SES). This study aimed to identify specific differences in perioperative management and outcomes based on patient SES and to study the role of a multidisciplinary clinic (MDC) in mitigating any variations.

METHODS

The study analyzed patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in a large hospital system. The patients were categorized into groups of high and low SES and whether they were managed by the authors' pancreatic cancer MDC or not. The study compared differences in disease characteristics, receipt of multimodality therapy, perioperative outcomes, and recurrence-free and overall survival.

RESULTS

Of the 162 low-SES patients and 119 high-SES patients, 54% were managed in the MDC. Outside the MDC, low-SES patients were less likely to receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy and had less minimally invasive surgery, a longer OR time, less enhanced recovery participation, and more major complications (p < 0.05). No SES disparities were observed among the MDC patients. Despite similar tumor characteristics, the low-SES patients had inferior median overall survival (21 vs 32 months; p = 0.005), but the MDC appeared to eliminate this disparity. Low SES correlated with inferior survival for the non-MDC patients (17 vs 32 months; p < 0.001), but not for the MDC patients (24 vs 25 months; p = 0.33). These findings persisted in the multivariable analysis.

CONCLUSION

A pancreatic cancer MDC standardizes treatment decisions, eliminates disparities in surgical outcomes, and improves survival for low-SES patients.

Treatment at Integrated Centers Might Bridge the Academic-Community Survival Gap in Patients With Metastatic Non-Small Cell Carcinoma of the Lung

BACKGROUND

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is responsible for the most cancer-related deaths in the United States. A better understanding of treatment-related disparities and ways to address them are important to improving survival for patients with metastatic NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis using the National Cancer Database. Included in this analysis were 107,116 patients with metastatic NSCLC who were treated at academic centers (AC), community-based centers (CC), and integrated centers (IC) between 2004 and 2015. The primary end point was overall survival, with comparisons of AC, CC, and IC.

RESULTS

The survival disparity between AC and CC continued to grow over the study period, from a 5.7% difference in 2-year survival to a 7.5% difference. Treatment at IC was initially associated with survival similar to CC (hazard ratio [HR], 0.93), however, later in the study period treatment at IC improved (HR, 0.74) outpacing the improvement in survival in CC (HR, 0.82) but not to the same degree as the improvement in AC (HR, 0.64). The improvement in survival at IC was noted predominantly in patients with adenocarcinoma (HR, 0.72; P < .001) but not in squamous-cell carcinoma (HR, 0.89; P value not significant).

CONCLUSION

Treatment of metastatic NSCLC at IC was associated with improved survival during our study period compared with treatment at CC. This appeared to be histology-dependent, suggesting a treatment-related improvement in survival because over this period newer therapies were preferentially available for adenocarcinoma. Integrating care across treatment facilities might be one way to bridge the growing gap in survival between AC and CC.

Real-world characteristics of women with endometriosis-related pain entering a multidisciplinary endometriosis program

BACKGROUND

Women with endometriosis are commonly treated by their sole provider. In this single-provider model of care, women frequently report long diagnostic delays, unresolved pelvic pain, multiple laparoscopic surgeries, sequential consultations with numerous providers, and an overall dissatisfaction with care. The emergence of multidisciplinary endometriosis centers aims to reduce diagnostic delays, improve pain management, and promote patient satisfaction; however, baseline data at the time of presentation to a multidisciplinary center are lacking.

METHODS

A real-world, retrospective, single-site, cross-sectional study of women with surgically confirmed and/or clinically diagnosed endometriosis generated baseline data for a planned longitudinal assessment of multidisciplinary care of endometriosis. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of patients experiencing mild, moderate, or severe pain for dysmenorrhea, non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP), and dyspareunia at entry into a multidisciplinary endometriosis clinic. Also explored were relationships between pain scores and clinical endpoints obtained from electronic medical records.

RESULTS

More than half (59%) of the study participants (n = 638) reported experiencing pelvic pain for ≥ 5 years. Pain intensity was highest for patients reporting dysmenorrhea, followed by NMPP, and dyspareunia. Significant correlations were observed between total pelvic pain and patient age (r = -0.22, p < 0.001, n = 506) and number of previous healthcare providers (r = 0.16, p = 0.006, n = 292); number of previous providers and duration of pain (r = 0.21, p = < 0.0001, n = 279); and duration of pain and years since diagnosis (r = 0.60, p < 0.001, n = 302). Mean pain scores differed significantly by age group for dysmenorrhea (p < 0.001), NMPP (p = 0.005), and total pelvic pain (p < 0.001), but not for dyspareunia (p = 0.06), with the highest mean pain scores reported among those < 30 years of age.

CONCLUSION

These real-world data indicate that in the single-provider model of care, unresolved pelvic pain is common among women with endometriosis. Alternative care models, including a multidisciplinary approach, need to be evaluated for improvements in clinical outcomes. These data also highlight the importance of addressing NMPP, which may be particularly troublesome for patients.

Low rates of specialized cancer consultation and cancer-directed therapy for noncurable pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a population-based analysis

BACKGROUND

Although advancements in systemic therapy have improved the outlook for pancreatic adenocarcinoma, it is not known if patients get access to these therapies. We aimed to examine the patterns and factors associated with access to specialized cancer consultations and subsequent receipt of cancer-directed therapy for patients with non-curative pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We conducted a population-based analysis of noncurative pancreatic adenocarcinoma diagnosed over 2005-2016 in Ontario by linking administrative health care data sets. Our primary outcomes were specialized cancer consultation and receipt of cancer-directed therapy (chemotherapy or a combination of chemo- and radiation therapy [chemoradiation therapy]). We examined specialized cancer consultation with hepato-pancreatico-biliary surgery, medical and radiation oncology. We used multivariable logistic regression to identify factors associated with medical oncology consultation and cancer-directed therapy.

RESULTS

Of 10 881 patients, 64.9% had a consultation with specialists in medical oncology, 35.1% with hepatopancreatico-biliary surgery and 24.7% with radiation oncology. Sociodemographic characteristics were not associated with the likelihood of medical oncology consultation. Of these patients, 4144 received cancer-directed therapy, representing 38.1% of all patients and 58.6% of those who consulted with medical oncology. Of 6737 patients not receiving cancer-directed therapy, 2988 (44.4%) had a consultation with medical oncology. Older age and lowest income quintile were independently associated with lower likelihood of cancer-directed therapy. If the first specialized cancer consultation was with medical or radiation oncology, the likelihood of cancer-directed therapy was significantly higher compared with surgery.

INTERPRETATION

A considerable proportion of patients with noncurable pancreatic adenocarcinoma in Ontario did not have a specialized cancer consultation and most did not receive cancer-directed therapy. We identified disparities in specialized cancer consultation and receipt of systemic cancer-directed therapy that indicate potential gaps in assessment.

Performance of a Multidisciplinary Pancreatic Cancer Conference in Predicting and Managing Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

OBJECTIVES

Surgery is the curative treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA). Guidelines recommend utilizing a multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer conference (MDPC) in treatment; however, data are limited. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of an MDPC.

METHODS

Patients with PDA presented at an MDPC were prospectively collected from April 2013 to August 2016. Patients were included if the MDPC predicted them to have resectable PDA and underwent upfront surgery. Secondary aims were to compare differences in tumor characteristics, time to surgery, and resection rates with patients prior to MDPC implementation (pre-MDPC).

RESULTS

A total of 278 patients were presented at the MDPC. After excluding borderline and nonresectable cases, 91 patients were predicted as resectable on evaluation, and 70 were fit for surgery. The MDPC predicted resection in 91.4%. The MDPC had larger tumor size (32.6 vs 24.0 mm), greater proportion of stage II tumor, and a shorter time from diagnosis to resection (27.3 vs 35.5 days) compared with the pre-MDPC. Microscopically negative resections were similar between MDPC and pre-MDPC (85.9% vs 88.0%) despite advanced tumor size and stage.

CONCLUSIONS

The MDPC demonstrates a high resection rate. Compared with a pre-MDPC, MDPC provides shorter time to surgery and selects for advanced tumors.

Chemotherapy in patients with unresected pancreatic cancer in Australia: A population-based study of uptake and survival

AIM

Palliative chemotherapy improves symptom control and prolongs survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer, but there is a paucity of data describing its use and effectiveness in everyday practice. We explored patterns of chemotherapy use in patients with unresected pancreatic cancer in Australia and the impact of use on survival.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of residents of New South Wales or Queensland, Australia, diagnosed with unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma between July 2009 and June 2011. Associations between receipt of chemotherapy and sociodemographic, clinical and health service factors were evaluated using logistic regression. We used Cox proportional hazards models to analyze associations between chemotherapy use and survival.

RESULTS

Data were collected for 1173 eligible patients. Chemotherapy was received by 44% (n = 184/414) of patients with localized pancreatic cancer and 53% (n = 406/759) of patients with metastases. Chemotherapy receipt depended on clinical factors, such as performance status and comorbidity burden, and nonclinical factors, such as age, place of residence, multidisciplinary team review and the type of specialist first encountered. Consultation with an oncologist mitigated most of the sociodemographic and service-related disparities in chemotherapy use. The receipt of chemotherapy was associated with prolonged survival in patients with inoperable pancreatic cancer, including after adjusting for common prognostic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the need to establish referral pathways to ensure that all patients have the opportunity to discuss treatment options with a medical oncologist. This is particularly relevant for health care systems covering areas with a geographically dispersed population.

Deviations from Expected Treatment of Pancreatic Cancer in Octogenarians: Analysis of Patient and Surgeon Factors

BACKGROUND

Morbidity and mortality of pancreatectomy has improved and chemotherapeutic options for pancreatic cancer (PC) are growing, yet there is reluctance to treat octogenarians. This study examined the reasons for failure to treat and analyzes outcomes in octogenarians with PC.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review 2005-2013. Demographics, tumor characteristics, treatment, reason for lack of treatment, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and survival were analyzed. Expected treatment for early-stage patients (I/II) included surgery ± chemotherapy ± radiation. Expected treatment for advanced stage patients (III/IV) was chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A total of 431 octogenarians were analyzed. Mean age was 84.0 ± 3.4, 59.6 % female, and 44.1 % received no treatment. Patients with operable tumors (I = 31 [7.2 %]/II = 214 [49.7 %]) had surgery 39.2 % of the time. Age was a predictor of not receiving surgery (odds ratio [OR] 0.78; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.70-0.86; p = 0.0001), whereas CCI was not. The most common reason for no surgery was contraindication despite similar CCI. Median overall survival for early-stage patients was better in the surgical group (15.8 vs. 5.5 months) than nonsurgical group (p < 0.0001). Advanced patients (III = 54 [12.5 %]/IV = 132 [30.6 %]) had similarly low treatment rates (n = 65 [34.9 %]). Survival for advanced disease was best for treated patients (6.9 vs. 1.8 months; p < 0.0001). CCI did not differ between those receiving chemotherapy and not, although age was significantly different (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant deviation from expected treatment for octogenarians with PC. While no correlation existed between CCI and treatment, age correlated with therapy for nearly all stages. Chronological age, not comorbidity, may drive recommendation for treatment in elderly patients.