Neoadjuvant therapy versus upfront surgery for borderline-resectable pancreatic cancer

Neoadjuvant therapy in borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: Outcomes in the era of changing practices and evolving evidence

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) is increasingly being used in the management of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC). We compared the outcomes of patients with BRPC treated either with upfront surgery (UPS) or NAT to assess whether increased use of NAT has helped improve perioperative and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

Prospectively maintained database of 201 consecutive patients with BRPC treated at Tata Memorial Center, India, from 2007-2019 was analyzed.

RESULTS

NAT was offered to 148 patients and 53 were planned for UPS. Progression on NAT was seen in 47 (31.8%) patients. Resection was performed in 103 patients (51.24%). The resection rate was significantly lower after NAT as compared with upfront explorations (42.56% vs 75.47%, P = .00) however, R0 resection rate after NAT was significantly better (74.6% vs 42.5%, P = .001). NAT group showed a significant decrease in the pT stage (P = .004), node positivity (60%-31.7%, P = .005%), and perineural invasion (70%-41.6% P = .026). There was no significant difference in the median overall survival (OS) of patients offered NAT versus UPS on an intention-to-treat basis (15 vs 18 months P = .431). However, OS (22 vs 19 months, P = .205) and disease-free survival (DFS) (16 vs 11 months, P = .135) were higher for resected patients in the NAT group and OS was significantly superior in patients completing the course of treatment (34 vs 22 months, P = .010) CONCLUSION: The progression rate with NAT in patients with BPRC was 31.8%. NAT was associated with significant pathologic downstaging, improvement in R0 resection rate, and survival in resected patients.

Survival and Robotic Approach for Pancreaticoduodenectomy: A Propensity Score-Match Study

BACKGROUND

Robotic surgery is a burgeoning minimally invasive approach to pancreaticoduodenectomy. This study was undertaken to compare survival after robotic vs "open" pancreaticoduodenectomy for ductal adenocarcinoma using propensity score-matched patients.

STUDY DESIGN

With institutional review board approval, we prospectively followed 521 patients who underwent robotic (n = 311) or open (n = 210) pancreaticoduodenectomy. Patients who underwent robotic (n = 75) or open (n = 75) pancreaticoduodenectomy were propensity score-matched by age, sex, and American Joint Committee on Cancer stage. Neoadjuvant therapy was rarely administered, and adjuvant therapy was stressed (FOLFIRINOX for patients <70 years of age and gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel for patients >70 years of age). Data are presented as median (mean ± SD).

RESULTS

Operative duration was longer and estimated blood loss and length of stay were less with robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (421 [409 ± 94.0] vs 267 [254 ± 81.2] minutes; 307 [(150 ± 605.3] vs 444 [255 ± 353.1] mL; 7 [5 ± 5.1] vs 11 [8 ± 9.5] days; p < 0.00001 for all). There were no differences in complications (Clavien-Dindo class ≥III, p = 0.30), in-hospital mortality (p = 0.61), or 30-day readmission rates (p = 0.19). Median survival after robotic vs open pancreaticoduodenectomy was 37 vs 24 months (p = 0.08). For propensity score-matched patients, operative duration for robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy was longer (442 [438 ± 117.7] vs 261 [249 ± 67.1] minutes) and estimated blood loss was less (269 [200 ± 296.1] vs 468 [300 ± 394.9] mL), as was length of stay (7 [5 ± 5.1] vs 10 [7 ± 8.6] days; p < 0.00001 for all). There were no differences in complication rates (Clavien-Dindo class ≥ III, p = 0.31) or in-hospital mortality (p = 0.40); 30-day readmissions were fewer after robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy (7% vs 20%, p = 0.03). Median survival for the robotic vs the open approach was 41 vs 17 months (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSION

Patients that underwent robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy had longer operations, less estimated blood loss, shorter length of stay, and fewer 30-day readmissions; they lived much longer than patients who underwent open pancreaticoduodenectomy. We believe that robotic pancreaticoduodenectomy provides salutary and survival benefits for reasons yet unknown.

Predicting Adverse Pathologic Features and Clinical Outcomes of Resectable Pancreas Cancer With Preoperative CA 19-9

Background

We evaluated preoperative CA 19-9 levels in patients with resected pancreatic cancer to analyze whether they were predictive of clinical outcomes and could help select patients for additional therapy. We hypothesized that elevated CA 19-9 would be associated with worse pathologic findings and oncologic outcomes.

Methods

This study assessed 509 patients with non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma who underwent resection at our institution from 1995-2011 and had preoperative CA 19-9 recorded. No patients received neoadjuvant therapy. CA 19-9 level was analyzed as a continuous and a dichotomized (> vs. ≤ 55 U/mL) variable using logistic and Cox models.

Results

Median follow-up was 7.8 years, and the median age was 66 years (33-90). 64% of patients had elevated preoperative CA 19-9 (median: 141 U/mL), that did not correlate with bilirubin level or tumor size. Most patients had ≥ T3 tumors (72%) and positive lymph nodes (62%). The rate of incomplete (R1 or R2) resection was 19%. Increasing preoperative CA 19-9 was associated with extra-pancreatic extension (p=0.0005), lymphovascular space invasion (p=0.0072), incomplete resection [HR (95% CI) 2.0 (1.2-3.5)], and lower OS [HR = 1.6 (1.3-2.0)]. Each doubling in preoperative CA 19-9 value was associated with an 8.3% increased risk of death [HR = 1.08 (1.02-1.15)] and a 10.0% increased risk of distant recurrence [HR = 1.10 (1.02-1.19)]. Patients classified as non-secretors had comparable outcomes to patients with normal CA 19-9.

Conclusions

Elevated preoperative CA 19-9 level was associated with adverse pathologic features, incomplete resection, and inferior clinical outcomes. Neither tumor size nor bilirubin confound an elevated CA 19-9 level. Preoperative CA 19-9 level may help select patients for additional therapy.