Tumor location, clinicopathological features, and perioperative and prognostic outcomes in patients who underwent pancreatic resection following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

/Objective: Preoperative treatment of resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is gaining popularity worldwide. However, the characteristics of tumors located in the pancreatic head (Ph), or those in the body or tail (Pbt), after surgery following neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) remain unclear. This study aimed to evaluate and compare the clinicopathological features, perioperative outcomes, and prognosis of patients with resectable PDAC who underwent NACRT followed by curative pancreatic resection, focusing on distinguishing between Ph and Pbt PDACs.

METHODS

We included 107 patients with resectable PDAC who underwent curative resection following NACRT between 2009 and 2023. Clinicopathological features, perioperative and prognostic outcomes, recurrence patterns, and prognoses were compared between Ph and Pbt PDAC groups.

RESULTS

Tumors were found in the Ph and Pbt in 64 and 43 patients, respectively. Albumin levels and lymphocyte-to-monocyte ratios after NACRT were significantly lower in the Ph group than in the Pbt group. The Pbt group showed significantly higher rates of positive peritoneal lavage cytology and serosal, arterial, and portal vein invasion than the Ph group did. Overall and recurrence-free survival were similar between the two groups. The most common site of initial postoperative recurrence was the lung only in both groups; however, the rate of peritoneal dissemination only was significantly higher in the Pbt group than in the Ph group.

CONCLUSIONS

The prognoses based on tumor locations in the Ph and Pbt after surgery following NACRT are similar. Following the resection of resectable Pbt PDAC, the possibility of peritoneal dissemination recurrence should be considered.

Fully covered self-expandable metallic stents versus plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with pancreatic head cancer and the risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis

Objectives

Optimal stents for preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) for patients with possible resectable pancreatic cancer remain controversial, and risk factors for post-endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography pancreatitis (PEP), followed by PBD, are unknown. In this study, the efficacy and safety of fully covered self-expandable metallic stents (FCSEMSs) and plastic stents (PSs) were compared, and the risk factors for PEP, followed by PBD, were investigated for patients with pancreatic cancer.

Methods

Consecutive patients with pancreatic cancer who underwent PBD between April 2005 and March 2022 were included. We retrospectively evaluated recurrent biliary obstruction, adverse events (AEs), and postoperative complications for FCSEMS and PS groups and investigated the risk factors for PEP.

Results

A total of 105 patients were included. There were 20 patients in the FCSEMS group and 85 patients in the PS group. For the FCSEMS group, the rate of recurrent biliary obstruction (0% vs. 25%, p = 0.03) was significantly lower. There was no difference in AE between the two groups. No significant differences were observed in the overall postoperative complications, but the volume of intraoperative bleeding was larger for the PS group than it was for the FCSEMS group (p < 0.001). From multivariate analysis, being female and lack of main pancreatic duct dilation were independent risk factors for pancreatitis (odds ratio, 5.68; p = 0.028; odds ratio, 4.91; p = 0.048).

Conclusions

FCSEMSs are thought to be preferable to PSs for PBD due to their longer time to recurrent biliary obstruction. Being female and the lack of main pancreatic duct dilation were risk factors for PEP.

Outcomes of 6-mm diameter fully covered self-expandable metal stents for preoperative biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer

Background

10-mm self-expandable metal stents (SEMSs) are commonly used for preoperative biliary drainage in pancreatic cancer. However, smaller diameter SEMSs have attracted attention with the attempt to reduce stent-related adverse events (AEs).

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed consecutive borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients who underwent neoadjuvant therapy and fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) placement from April 2015 to May 2023. The primary outcome was stent-related non-event rate (NER), which was defined as the rate of completion of surgery without developing any preoperative events (recurrent biliary obstruction [RBO] or stent-related AEs). Secondary outcomes included stent-related AEs, causes of RBO, and cumulative incidence of RBO. Risk factors for pancreatitis, RBO, and stent migration were also examined.

Results

A total of 76 patients were included (6-mm group: 23; 10-mm group: 53). Stent-related NER (57% vs. 64%, p = 0.610), stent-related AEs (4% vs. 15%, p = 0.263), overall RBO rates (39% vs. 23%, p = 0.168), cumulative incidence of RBO (hazard ratio, 2.24; 95% confidence interval, 0.95-5.25; p = 0.065) were not significantly different between the two groups. Tumor involvement of the pancreatic duct was identified as a risk-reducing factor for pancreatitis, while an FCSEMS diameter of 6 mm was not identified as a risk factor for RBO and stent migration.

Conclusions

Stent-related NER was not significantly affected by FCSEMS diameter. Further studies are needed to confirm the usefulness of 6-mm diameter FCSEMS for preoperative biliary drainage in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus upfront surgery for resectable pancreatic head cancer (NORPACT-1): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

In patients undergoing resection for pancreatic cancer, adjuvant modified fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) improves overall survival compared with alternative chemotherapy regimens. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX with the standard strategy of upfront surgery in patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

NORPACT-1 was a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 12 hospitals in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and had a resectable tumour of the pancreatic head radiologically strongly suspected to be pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Participants were randomly assigned (3:2 before October, 2018, and 1:1 after) to the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group or upfront surgery group. Patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received four neoadjuvant cycles of FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus then 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle), followed by surgery and adjuvant chemotherapy. Patients in the upfront surgery group underwent surgery and then received adjuvant chemotherapy. Initially, adjuvant chemotherapy was gemcitabine plus capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 over 30 min on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle and capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily for 3 weeks with 1 week of rest in each 28-day cycle; four cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, six cycles in the upfront surgery group). A protocol amendment was subsequently made to permit use of adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, and fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 h on day 1 of each 14-day cycle; eight cycles in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group, 12 cycles in the upfront surgery group). Randomisation was performed with a computerised algorithm that stratified for each participating centre and used a concealed block size of two to six. Patients, investigators, and study team members were not masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was overall survival at 18 months. Analyses were done in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol populations. Safety was assessed in all patients who were randomly assigned and received at least one cycle of neoadjuvant or adjuvant therapy. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02919787, and EudraCT, 2015-001635-21, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 8, 2017, and April 21, 2021, 77 patients were randomly assigned to receive neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and 63 to undergo upfront surgery. All patients were included in the ITT analysis. For the per-protocol analysis, 17 (22%) patients were excluded from the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group (ten did not receive neoadjuvant therapy, four did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, and three received another neoadjuvant regimen), and eight (13%) were excluded from the upfront surgery group (seven did not have pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma and one did not undergo surgical exploration). 61 (79%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group received neoadjuvant therapy. The proportion of patients alive at 18 months by ITT was 60% (95% CI 49-71) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 73% (62-84) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·032), and median overall survival by ITT was 25·1 months (95% CI 17·2-34·9) versus 38·5 months (27·6-not reached; hazard ratio [HR] 1·52 [95% CI 1·00-2·33], log-rank p=0·050). The proportion of patients alive at 18 months in per-protocol analysis was 57% (95% CI 46-67) in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group versus 70% (55-83) in the upfront surgery group (p=0·14), and median overall survival in per-protocol population was 23·0 months (95% CI 16·2-34·9) versus 34·4 months (19·4-not reached; HR 1·46 [95% CI 0·99-2·17], log-rank p=0·058). In the safety population, 42 (58%) of 73 patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (40%) of 47 patients in the upfront surgery group had at least one grade 3 or worse adverse event. 63 (82%) of 77 patients in the neoadjuvant group and 56 (89%) of 63 patients in the upfront surgery group had resection (p=0·24). One sudden death of unknown cause and one COVID-19-related death occurred after the first cycle of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX. Adjuvant chemotherapy was initiated in 51 (86%) of 59 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 44 (90%) of 49 patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the upfront surgery group (p=0·56). Adjuvant modified FOLFIRINOX was given to 13 (25%) patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and 19 (43%) patients in the upfront surgery group. During adjuvant chemotherapy, neutropenia (11 [22%] patients in the neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX group and five [11%] in the upfront surgery group) was the most common grade 3 or worse adverse event.

INTERPRETATION

This phase 2 trial did not show a survival benefit from neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma compared with upfront surgery. Implementation of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX was challenging. Future trials on treatment sequencing in resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma should be biomarker driven.

FUNDING

Norwegian Cancer Society, South Eastern Norwegian Health Authority, The Sjöberg Foundation, and Helsinki University Hospital Research Grants.

Fragmented care in localized pancreatic cancer: Is commission on cancer accreditation associated with improved overall survival?

BACKGROUND

Prior studies of fragmentation of care in pancreatic cancer have not adjusted for indicators of hospital quality such as Commission on Cancer accreditation. The effect of fragmentation of care has not been well defined.

METHODS

We queried the National Cancer Database to identify patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy and distal pancreatectomy with perioperative systemic therapy for clinical stages I-III pancreatic cancer between 2006 and 2019. Patients who received systemic therapy at a center different than the center performing surgery were categorized as having fragmentation of care. Patients having fragmentation of care were further categorized on the basis of whether (fragmentation of care Commission on Cancer) or not (fragmentation of care non-Commission on Cancer) systemic therapy was administered at a facility accredited by the Commission on Cancer.

RESULTS

A total of 11,732 patients met inclusion criteria; 5,668 (48.3%) underwent fragmentation of care, and 3,426 (29.2%) fragmentation of care non-Commission on Cancer. Patients undergoing fragmentation of care non-Commission on Cancer were less likely to receive neoadjuvant systemic therapy than those undergoing fragmentation of care Commission on Cancer or non-fragmented care (27.7% vs 40.1% vs 36.8%, P < .001). On Cox analysis, advanced age, comorbid disease, node-positive disease, and facility type were associated with risk of overall survival. Fragmentation of care was not (adjusted hazard ratio = 0.99, 95% confidence interval [0.94-1.06], P = .8). On Kaplan-Meier analysis, there were no significant differences in 5-year overall survival between treatment cohorts.

CONCLUSION

In patients undergoing fragmentation of care for localized pancreatic cancer, those treated with systemic therapy in Commission on Cancer accredited facilities are more likely to be given neoadjuvant therapy but demonstrate no significant improvement in survival relative to those undergoing non-fragmented care or those undergoing fragmentation of care but receiving systemic therapy in nonaccredited facilities.

Identification of patients at high risk for recurrence in carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater: Analysis in 460 patients

Aim

Carcinoma of the ampulla of Vater (CAV) shows a favorable prognosis compared to that with the other periampullary tumors, while some cases have a poor prognosis. The aims of the present study are to clarify the clinicopathological factors associated with poor recurrence-free survival (RFS) in patients with CAV after curative resection and to validate the usefulness of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC).

Patients

The study design is a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Patients with CAV who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy between January 2008 and December 2020 at 26 hospitals were analyzed. The 30 clinicopathological factors were evaluated. A propensity score matching (PSM) was used to compare between patients with and without AC.

Results

Finally, 460 patients were analyzed. Median duration of follow-up was 47.2 months. Twenty-one prognostic factors associated with poor RFS were identified by univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, aged ≥71, tumor diameter ≥12 mm, pT2 or higher stage (pT≥2), portal vein invasion (PV+), venous invasion(V+), and node positive disease (pN+) were independent prognostic factors for poor RFS. Out of 80 patients who received AC, 63 patients were assigned to analysis for PSM. The results showed no beneficial effect of AC on RFS. The preoperative factors potentially predicting pT≥2, V+, and/or N+ were at least one of following; (1) CA19-9 > 37 IU/mL, (2) ulcerative or mixed type appearance, (3) except for well-differentiated tumor, or (4) except for intestinal subtype of histology.

Conclusions

Aged ≥71, tumor diameter ≥12 mm, pT≥2, PV+, V+, and pN+ were independent prognostic factors for poor RFS in patients with CAV. An additional therapeutic strategy may be desirable in CAV patients at high risk for recurrence.

Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Literature Review and Our Experience of NAC-GS

In addition to established evidence of the efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy (AC) for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), evidence of the effects of neoadjuvant treatments (NATs), including chemotherapy and chemoradiotherapy, has also been accumulating. Recent results from prospective studies and meta-analyses suggest that NATs may be beneficial not only for borderline resectable PDAC, but also for resectable PDAC, by increasing the likelihood of successful R0 resection, decreasing the likelihood of the development of lymph node metastasis, and improving recurrence-free and overall survival. In addition, response to NAT may be informative for predicting the clinical course after preoperative NAT followed by surgery; in this way, the postoperative treatment strategy can be revised based on the effect of NAT and the post-neoadjuvant therapy/surgery histopathological findings. On the other hand, the response to NAT and AC is also influenced by the tumor biology and the patient's immune/nutritional status; therefore, planning of the treatment strategy and meticulous management of NAT, surgery, and AC is required on a patient-by-patient basis. Our experience of using gemcitabine plus S-1 showed that this NAT regimen achieved tumor shrinkage and decreased the levels of tumor markers but failed to provide a survival benefit. Our results also suggested that response/adverse events to NAT may be predictive of the efficacy of AC, as well as survival outcomes.

Reconsidering resectable oncological conditions in pancreatic tail cancer: A multicenter retrospective study on prognostic factors in pancreatic tail cancer after resection (HOPS Pt-01)

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic tail cancer (Pt-PC) is generally considered resectable when metastasis is absent, but doubts persist in clinical practice due to the variability in local tumor extent. We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to comprehensively identify prognostic factors associated with Pt-PC after resection.

METHODS

We enrolled 100 patients that underwent distal pancreatectomy. The optimal combination of factors influencing relapse-free survival (RFS) was determined using the maximum likelihood method (MLM) and corrected Akaike and Bayesian information criteria (AICc and BIC). Prognostic elements were then validated to predict oncological outcomes.

RESULTS

Therapeutic interventions included neoadjuvant treatment in 16 patients and concomitant visceral resection (CVR) in 37 patients; 89 patients achieved R0. Median RFS and OS after surgery were 23.1 and 37.1 months, respectively. AICc/BIC were minimized in the model with ASA-PS (≥2), CA19-9 (≥112 U/mL at baseline, non-normalized postoperatively), need for CVR, 6 pathological items (tumor diameter ≥19.5 mm, histology G1, invasion of the anterior pancreatic border, splenic vein invasion, splenic artery invasion, lymph node metastasis), and completed adjuvant treatment (cAT) for RFS. Regarding the predictive value of these 11 factors, area under the curve was 0.842 for 5-year RFS. Multivariate analysis of these 11 factors showed that predictors of RFS include CVR (hazard ratio, 2.13; 95 % confidence interval, 1.08-4.19; p = 0.028) and cAT (0.38, 0.19-0.76; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The MLM identified certain Pt-PC cases warranting consideration beyond resectable during clinical management. Particular attention should be paid to conditions requiring CVR, even though immortal time bias remains unresolved with adjuvant treatment.

Machine Learning of Histopathological Images Predicts Recurrences of Resected Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma With Adjuvant Treatment

OBJECTIVES

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an intractable disease with frequent recurrence after resection and adjuvant therapy. The present study aimed to clarify whether artificial intelligence-assisted analysis of histopathological images can predict recurrence in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent resection and adjuvant chemotherapy with tegafur/5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine/potassium oxonate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-nine patients were enrolled in the study. Machine-learning algorithms were applied to 10-billion-scale pixel data of whole-slide histopathological images to generate key features using multiple deep autoencoders. Areas under the curve were calculated from receiver operating characteristic curves using a support vector machine with key features alone and by combining with clinical data (age and carbohydrate antigen 19-9 and carcinoembryonic antigen levels) for predicting recurrence. Supervised learning with pathological annotations was conducted to determine the significant features for predicting recurrence.

RESULTS

Areas under the curves obtained were 0.73 (95% confidence interval, 0.59-0.87) by the histopathological data analysis and 0.84 (95% confidence interval, 0.73-0.94) by the combinatorial analysis of histopathological data and clinical data. Supervised learning model demonstrated that poor tumor differentiation was significantly associated with recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicate that machine learning with the integration of artificial intelligence-driven evaluation of histopathological images and conventional clinical data provides relevant prognostic information for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

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.

The role of diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers in the management of early pancreatic cancer

Despite modern advances in cancer medicine, pancreatic cancer survival remains unchanged at just 12%. For the small proportion of patients diagnosed with 'early' (upfront or borderline resectable) disease, recurrences are common, and many recur soon after surgery. Whilst chemotherapy has been shown to increase survival in this cohort, the morbidity of surgery renders many candidates unsuitable for adjuvant treatment. Due to this, and the success of upfront chemotherapy in the advanced setting, use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has been introduced in patients with upfront or borderline resectable disease. Randomized controlled trials have been conducted to compare upfront surgery to neoadjuvant chemotherapy in this patient cohort, opinions on the ideal upfront treatment approach are divided. This lack of consensus has highlighted the need for biomarkers to assist in clinical decision making. This review analyses the potential diagnostic, prognostic and predictive biomarkers that may assist in the diagnosis and management of early (upfront and borderline resectable) pancreatic cancer.

National adoption of neoadjuvant chemotherapy: paradigm shift in the treatment of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

The historical standard of care in treating operable pancreatic cancer via upfront surgery has been challenged recently using a neoadjuvant approach. The aim of the study is to examine the national practice patterns in the management of pancreatic cancer with an emphasis on the trends of neoadjuvant systemic therapy use.

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional time-series study using the National Cancer Database from 2006 to 2019. Patients who underwent resection for stage I-II pancreatic adenocarcinoma were selected.

RESULTS

Overall, 25% of patients had neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 49% had surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy and 26% had surgery alone. The rate of neoadjuvant chemotherapy has increased from 11% in 2006 to 43% in 2019. There was a decrease in the rate of surgery followed by chemotherapy from 48% to 38%, and a decrease in the rate of surgery alone from 41% to 19%. The rate of radiation therapy use has decreased over time, as has the resection rate, while median overall survival has steadily improved over the years.

CONCLUSIONS

In 2019, the rate of using neoadjuvant systemic therapy overtook the rate of surgery first followed by adjuvant systemic therapy, marking a pragmatic national shift in the clinical management of pancreatic cancer.

Current clinical practice in the management of Brazilian patients with potentially resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC)

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

We aimed to describe the routine clinical practice of physicians involved in the treatment of patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in Brazil.

METHODS

Physicians were invited through email and text messages to participate in an electronic survey sponsored by the Brazilian Gastrointestinal Tumor Group (GTG) and the Brazilian Society of Surgical Oncology (SBCO). We evaluated the relationship between variable categories numerically with false discovery rate-adjusted Fisher's exact test p values and graphically with Multiple Correspondence Analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 255 physicians answered the survey. Most (52.5%) were medical oncologists, treated patients predominantly in the private setting (71.0%), and had access to multidisciplinary tumor boards (MTDTB; 76.1%). Medical oncologists were more likely to describe neoadjuvant therapy as beneficial in the resectable setting and surgeons in the borderline resectable setting. Most physicians would use information on risk factors for early recurrence, frailty, and type of surgery to decide treatment strategy. Doctors working predominantly in public institutions were less likely to have access to MTDTB and to consider FOLFIRINOX the most adequate regimen in the neoadjuvant setting.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable differences exist in the management of localized PDAC, some of them possibly explained by the medical specialty, but also by the funding source of health care.

Preoperative treatment with mFOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine/Nab-paclitaxel +/- isotoxic high-dose stereotactic body Radiation Therapy (iHD-SBRT) for borderline resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma (the STEREOPAC trial): study protocol for a randomised comparative multicenter phase II trial

BACKGROUND

For patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment. Surgery is generally followed by postoperative chemotherapy associated with improved survival, yet neoadjuvant therapy is a rapidly emerging concept requiring to be explored and validated in terms of treatment options and oncological outcomes. In this context, stereotactic body radiation (SBRT) appears feasible and can be safely integrated into a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen of modified FOLFIRINOX (mFFX) with promising benefits in terms of R0 resection, local control and survival. However, the optimal therapeutic sequence is still not known, especially for borderline resectable PDAC, and the role of adding SBRT to chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting needs to be evaluated in randomised controlled trials. The aim of the STEREOPAC trial is to assess the impact and efficacy of adding isotoxic high-dose SBRT (iHD-SBRT) to neoadjuvant mFFX or Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel (Gem/Nab-P) in patients with borderline resectable PDAC.

METHODS

This is a randomised comparative multicentre phase II trial, planning to enrol patients (n = 256) diagnosed with a borderline resectable biopsy-confirmed PDAC. Patients will receive 4 cycles of mFFX (or 6 doses of Gem/Nab-P). After full disease restaging, non-progressive patients will be randomised for receiving either 4 additional mFFX cycles (or 6 doses of Gem/Nab-P) (Arm A), or 2 mFFX cycles (or 3 doses of Gem/Nab-P) + iHD-SBRT (35 to 55 Gy in 5 fractions) + 2 mFFX cycles (or 3 doses of Gem/Nab-P) (Arm B). Then curative surgery will be performed followed by adjuvant chemotherapy according to patient's condition. The co-primary endpoints are R0 resection and disease-free survival after the complete sequence strategy. The secondary endpoints include resection rate, overall survival, locoregional failure / distant metastasis free interval, pathologic complete response, toxicity, postoperative complications and quality of life assessment.

DISCUSSION

This trial will help define the best neoadjuvant treatment sequence for borderline resectable PDAC and aims to evaluate if a total neoadjuvant treatment integrating iHD-SBRT improves the patients' oncological outcomes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at ClinicalTrails.gov (NCT05083247) on October 19th, 2021, and in the Clinical Trials Information System (CTIS) EU CT database (2022-501181-22-01) on July 2022.

Neoadjuvant and Adjuvant Treatments for Resectable and Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: The Current Status of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Treatment in Japan

Resection is the only curative treatment for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Although the outcome of technically resectable PDAC has improved with advances in surgery and adjuvant therapy, the 5-year survival rate remains low at 20% to 40%. More effective therapy is needed. Almost 15 years ago, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines proposed a resectability classification of PDAC based on preoperative imaging. Since then, treatment strategies for PDAC have been devised based on resectability. The standard of care for resectable PDAC is adjuvant chemotherapy after R0 resection, as shown by the results of pivotal clinical trials. With regard to neoadjuvant treatment, several recent clinical trials comparing neoadjuvant treatment with upfront resection have been conducted on resectable PDAC and borderline resectable PDAC, and the benefits and efficacy of neoadjuvant treatment for pancreatic cancer has become clearer. The significance of neoadjuvant treatment for resectable PDAC remains controversial, but in borderline resectable PDAC the efficacy of neoadjuvant treatment has been further recognised, although the standard of care has not yet been established. Several promising clinical trials for PDAC are ongoing. This review presents previous and ongoing trials of perioperative treatment for resectable and borderline resectable PDAC, focusing on the difference between Asian and Western countries.

Safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with moderately hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer: A prospective, open-label, phase II study

BACKGROUND

Resectable pancreatic cancer (RPC) is potentially resectable on admission, and the impact of neoadjuvant therapy on these tumors is controversial. Moreover, the safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with moderately hypofractionated intensity-modulated radiation therapy (NACIMRT) for RPC have not been studied. Here, we conducted a phase II study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of hypofractionated NACIMRT for RPC.

METHODS

A total of 54 RPC patients were enrolled and treated according to the study protocol. We used moderately hypofractionated (45 Gy in 15 fractions) IMRT with gemcitabine to shorten the duration of radiotherapy and reduce gastrointestinal toxicity. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and we subsequently analyzed the microscopically margin-negative resection (R0) rate, disease-free survival (DFS), and histologic effects and safety of NACIMRT.

RESULTS

Median OS for the cohort was 40.0 months. Forty-two patients (77.8%) underwent pancreatectomy after NACIMRT. Median DFS was 20.3 months. The R0 resection rate was 95.2% (40/42) per protocol and 85.2% (46/54) for the cohort. There were no intervention-related deaths during the study period. Local treatment response, as assessed by the CAP classification, showed no residual tumor in 4.8% of patients. Overall, 23.9% of patients experienced CTCAE grade 3 or 4 during NACIMRT. Adjuvant therapy was initiated in 88% of patients undergoing resection. Postoperative complications grade ≥3b on the Clavien-Dindo scale occurred in 4.8% of patients. CA19-9 level at enrollment was an independent prognostic factor for OS and DFS.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first prospective study of hypofractionated IMRT as neoadjuvant therapy for RPC. Hypofractionated NACIMRT for RPC could be safely introduced with a high induction rate of adjuvant chemotherapy, with an overall survival of 40.0 months.

Phase I study of neoadjuvant S-1 plus cisplatin with concurrent radiation for biliary tract cancer (Tokyo Study Group for Biliary Cancer: TOSBIC02)

Aim

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy may improve survival in patients with advanced cholangiocarcinoma. This Phase I study aimed to determine the recommended dose of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy and decide whether to move to a Phase II study.

Methods

Patients diagnosed with resectable stage II-IVa cholangiocarcinoma were administered cisplatin (40 [level 0], 50 [level 1 as starting dose], or 60 [level 2] mg/m2), 80 mg/m2 of S-1, and 50.4 Gy of external beam radiation. The recommended dose was defined as a dose one-step lower than the maximum-tolerated dose, which was defined when dose-limiting toxicity was observed in three or more of the six patients.

Results

Twelve patients were eligible from November 2012 to May 2016. Ten patients had perihilar cholangiocarcinoma and two patients had distal cholangiocarcinoma. Dose-limiting toxicity was observed in one of the first six patients at level 1 and two of the next six patients at level 2; thus, the maximum-tolerated dose was not determined even at level 2 and the recommended dose was determined as level 2. Four patients had partial response, four patients had stable disease, and two patients had progression of disease because of liver metastases. Finally, nine patients underwent radical surgery and seven cases achieved R0 resection. However, five cases suffered biliary leakage and one suffered intrahospital death due to rupture of the hepatic artery.

Conclusion

We determined the recommended dose of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for resectable cholangiocarcinoma. However, we terminated the trial due to a high incidence of morbidity and unexpected mortality.

The experience of neoadjuvant chemotherapy versus upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer: a cross sectional study

BACKGROUND

Upfront resection (UR) followed by adjuvant chemotherapy remains the standard treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer. There is increasing evidence suggesting favourable outcomes toward neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) followed by surgery.

METHODS

All clinical staging with resectable pancreatic cancer patients treated at a tertiary medical centre from 2013 to 2020 were identified. The baseline characteristics, treatment course, surgery outcome and survival results of UR or NAC were compared.

RESULTS

Finally, in 159 resectable patients, 46 patients (29%) underwent NAC and 113 patients (71%) received UR. In NAC, 11 patients (24%) did not receive resection, 4 (36.4%) for comorbidity, 2 (18.2%) for patient refusal and 2 (18.2%) for disease progression. In UR, 13 patients (12%) were unresectable intraoperatively; 6 (46.2%) for locally advanced and 5 (38.5%) for distant metastasis. Overall, 97% of patients in NAC and 58% of patients in UR completed adjuvant chemotherapy. As of data cut-off, 24 patients (69%) in NAC and 42 patients (29%) in UR were still tumour free. The median recurrence-free survival in NAC, UR with adjuvant chemotherapy and without adjuvant chemotherapy were 31.3 months (95% CI, 14.4-not estimable), 10.6 months (95% CI, 9.0-14.3) and 8.5 months (95% CI, 5.8-11.8), P =0.036; and the median overall survival in each group were not reached (95% CI, 29.7-not estimable), 25.9 months (95% CI, 21.1-40.5) and 21.7 months (12.0-32.8), P =0.0053. Based on initial clinical staging, the median overall survival of NAC was not significantly different from UR with a tumour less than or equal to 2 cm, P =0.29. NAC patients had a higher R0 resection rate (83% versus 53%), lower recurrence rate (31% versus 71%) and harvested median number lymph node (23 versus 15).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that NAC is superior to UR in resectable pancreatic cancer with better survival.

Advanced pancreatic cancer with long-term recurrence-free survival after radical pancreatic resection and subsequent resection of lung metastases twice: A case report

INTRODUCTION AND IMPORTANCE

Reports on lung resection for recurrence with lung metastases after the surgical treatment of pancreatic cancer have been sporadic, and limited information is currently available on the long-term postoperative course. Furthermore, the significance of the surgical resection of recurrent/metastatic lesions after the resection of pancreatic cancer has not been sufficiently established. We herein present a long-term recurrence-free survivor after perioperative chemotherapy and pancreatic resection for primary pancreatic body cancer who underwent resection for isolated lung metastases twice.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 66-year-old woman with locally advanced pancreatic cancer accompanied by invasion of the splenic artery underwent distal pancreatectomy with celiac axis resection following preoperative S1 + gemcitabine therapy. Recurrence with lung metastasis was detected 42 and 62 months after resection of the primary lesion, and lung resection was performed both times. As postoperative adjuvant therapies, S1 + gemcitabine therapy was performed after lung resection. The patient has survived free of recurrence for 11 years after resection of the primary lesion and 5 years and 9 months after the second lung resection.

CLINICAL DISCUSSION

A long interval from resection of the primary lesion to the occurrence of lung metastases and the high responsiveness of the patient to chemotherapy may have contributed to her long-term survival.

CONCLUSION

This case suggests that if lung metastasis occurring after radical resection of the primary lesion is resected without remnants, aggressive multidisciplinary treatment, including surgical resection with the appropriate selection of cases, may contribute to improvements in patient outcomes.

Comprehensive review of undifferentiated carcinoma of the pancreas: from epidemiology to treatment

Undifferentiated carcinoma (UC) of the pancreas is a rare subtype of pancreatic cancer displaying no definitive direction of differentiation. UC has been reported as a highly aggressive malignant neoplasm, with a median overall survival of <1 year, except for several surgical series. On the other hand, UC tissue sometimes contains non-neoplastic osteoclast-like giant cells (OGCs), and such cases have been reported to have relatively longer survival. Thus, the World Health Organization (WHO) classification histologically distinguishes UC with OGCs (UCOGCs) from UC, and UCs were subclassified into three subtypes: anaplastic UC, sarcomatoid UC and carcinosarcoma. However, still less is known about UC due to its rarity, and such situations lead to further difficulties in treatment for UC. To date, only surgical resection can offer curative treatment for patients with UC, and no clear evidence for chemotherapy exists for them. However, a retrospective cohort study and case reports showed that relatively promising results paclitaxel-containing regimens for treatment of patients with unresectable UC. Furthermore, high programmed cell death protein 1 expression has been reported in sarcomatoid UCs and UCOGCs, and promising responses to anti-programmed death-ligand 1 therapy have been described in case reports of UCOGCs. Recent advances in chemotherapeutic agents and molecular technologies are opening up the possibilities for expanded treatments.

Risk factors for early recurrence in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent curative resection

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is one of the most lethal cancers, and surgical resection is the only potentially curative approach. However, the rate of recurrence remains high, particularly within the first 6 months, and is associated with a poor prognosis. The present study evaluated the clinical characteristics and risk factors for early recurrence in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients who underwent curative resection, regardless of the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, to identify predictive factors associated with early recurrence and poor outcomes as well as to determine the optimal treatment strategy for patients at high risk of early recurrence after surgical resection.

METHODS

Patients who underwent pancreatic resection for PDAC at our institution from 2013 to 2021 were included in this study. We investigated the clinicopathological features of patients in groups: those with recurrence within 6 months, recurrence between 6 and 12 months, and recurrence beyond 12 months or no recurrence. A logistic regression analysis identified covariates associated with early recurrence at 6 and 12 months.

RESULTS

The study included 403 patients with a median follow-up of 25.7 months. Recurrence was observed in 279 patients, with 14.6% recurring within 6 months, 23.3% within 6-12 months, and 62% after 12 months or not at all. The preoperative CA19-9 level, modified Glasgow prognostic score (mGPS), and positive peritoneal cytology were significant risk factors for early recurrence within 6 months, while positive peritoneal cytology, lymph node metastasis, and the absence of adjuvant chemotherapy were significant risk factors for recurrence within 12 months. For patients who received preoperative chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy, the preoperative CA19-9 level, mGPS, and positive peritoneal cytology were significant independent risk factors for early recurrence within 6 months, while positive peritoneal cytology, lymph node metastasis, and the absence of adjuvant chemotherapy were significant independent risk factors for recurrence within 12 months. The study concluded that the overall survival after surgical resection for potentially resectable PDAC worsened according to the number of risk factors present in the patient.

CONCLUSIONS

We clarified that preoperative CA19-9, positive peritoneal cytology, and the lack of adjuvant chemotherapy were consistent predictors for early recurrence within 6 and 12 months. In addition, an increased number of risk factors affecting the patient was associated with a poorer overall survival after potentially curable resection. Calculating the number of risk factors for early recurrence may be an essential predictive factor when considering treatment strategies.

Perioperative or adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX for resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-3): study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach.

METHODS

This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized.

DISCUSSION

The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021.

Current progress in perioperative chemotherapy for biliary tract cancer

Biliary tract cancer (BTCs) is a heterogeneous malignancy divided into cholangiocarcinoma, gallbladder cancer, and ampullary cancer. Due to little or no symptoms, most patients with BTCs are diagnosed with unresectable or metastatic disease. Only 20%-30% of all BTCs are suitable for potentially resectable diseases. Although radical resection with a negative surgical margin is the only potentially curative method for BTCs, most patients develop postoperative recurrence, which is associated with poor prognosis. Therefore, perioperative treatment is necessary to improve survival. There are very few randomized phase III clinical trials of perioperative chemotherapy due to the relative rarity of BTCs. Adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 for patients with resected BTC significantly increased overall survival compared with upfront surgery in a recent ASCOT trial. In East Asia, S-1 is currently considered the standard adjuvant chemotherapy, while capecitabine may still be used in other areas. Since then, our phase III trial (KHBO1401), gemcitabine and cisplatin plus S-1 (GCS) has become the standard chemotherapy for advanced BTCs. GCS not only improved overall survival but demonstrated a high response rate. The efficacy of GCS as a preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable BTCs has been investigated in a randomized phase III trial (JCOG1920) in Japan. In this review, we summarize the current and ongoing clinical trials focusing on adjuvant and neoadjuvant chemotherapy for BTCs.

Tolerability, Attrition Rates, and Survival Outcomes of Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX for Nonmetastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Intent-to-Treat Analysis

BACKGROUND

FOLFIRINOX is increasingly used in the management of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). However, neoadjuvant therapy is associated with toxicity, possible disease progression, and biopsy-related and biliary complications that may preclude operative exploration. Data on the true attrition rate outside of clinical trials or resected surgical series are lacking.

STUDY DESIGN

Patients with nonmetastatic PDAC who initiated FOLFIRINOX from 2015 to 2020 were identified from our institution's pharmacy records. Multivariable regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used for adjusted analyses of categorical and survival outcomes, respectively.

RESULTS

Of 254 patients who initiated first-line neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX, 199 (78.3%) underwent exploration, and 54 (21.3%) did not complete their chemotherapy cycles due to poor tolerability (46.3%), poor response (31.5%), or disease progression (14.8%), among other causes (7.4%). A total of 109 (42.9%) patients experienced grade 3/4 FOLFIRINOX-related toxicity, of whom 73 (28.7%) and 100 (39.4%) required an emergency department visit or inpatient admission, respectively. Finally, not undergoing surgical exploration was associated with impaired overall survival (hazard ratio 7.0; 95% CI 3.8 to 12.8; p < 0.001). Independent predictors of not undergoing exploration were remote history of chemotherapy receipt (odds ratio [OR] 0.06; p = 0.02), inability to complete FOLFIRINOX cycles (OR 0.2, p = 0.003), increase in ECOG score (OR 0.2, p < 0.001), and being single or divorced (OR 0.3, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Among 254 patients with nonmetastatic PDAC initiated on FOLFIRINOX, of whom 52% were locally advanced, a total of 199 (78.3%) were explored, 142 (71.4%) underwent successful resection, and 129 (90.8%) were resected with negative margins. Despite 109 (42.9)% of patients experiencing significant toxicity, most patients could be managed through treatment-related complications to complete planned neoadjuvant chemotherapy and undergo planned surgical exploration.

Current Approaches for the Curative-Intent Surgical Treatment of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Radical resection is the only curative treatment for pancreatic cancer. However, only up to 20% of patients are considered eligible for surgical resection at the time of diagnosis. Although upfront surgery followed by adjuvant chemotherapy has become the gold standard of treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer there are numerous ongoing trials aiming to compare the clinical outcomes of various surgical strategies (e.g., upfront surgery or neoadjuvant treatment with subsequent resection). Neoadjuvant treatment followed by surgery is considered the best approach in borderline resectable pancreatic tumors. Individuals with locally advanced disease are now candidates for palliative chemo- or chemoradiotherapy; however, some patients may become eligible for resection during the course of such treatment. When metastases are found, the cancer is qualified as unresectable. It is possible to perform radical pancreatic resection with metastasectomy in selected cases of oligometastatic disease. The role of multi-visceral resection, which involves reconstruction of major mesenteric veins, is well known. Nonetheless, there are some controversies in terms of arterial resection and reconstruction. Researchers are also trying to introduce personalized treatments. The careful, preliminary selection of patients eligible for surgery and other therapies should be based on tumor biology, among other factors. Such selection may play a key role in improving survival rates in patients with pancreatic cancer.

Preoperative treatments in borderline resectable and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: current evidence and new perspectives

Surgery is the only curative treatment for non-metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma, but less than 20% of patients present a resectable disease at diagnosis. Treatment strategies and disease definition for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BRPC) and locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) vary in the different cancer centres. Preoperative chemotherapy (CT) is the standard of care for both BRPC and LAPC patients, however literature data are still controversial concerning the type, dose and duration of the different CT regimens, as well as regarding the integration of radiotherapy (RT) or chemoradiation (CRT) in the therapeutic algorithm. In this unsettled debate, we aimed at focusing on the therapeutic regimens currently in use and relative literature data, to report international trials comparing the available therapeutic options or explore the introduction of new pharmacological agents, and to analyse possible new scenarios in microenvironment evaluation before and after neoadjuvant therapies or in patients' selection at a molecular level.

Role for Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy for Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Cancer

Despite aggressive adjuvant management, a high percentage of patients who undergo appropriate surgical resection for pancreatic cancer will see their cancer recur and thus will not be cured. An important paradigm shift to achieve better outcomes has been therapy sequence, with neoadjuvant chemotherapy preceding surgery. Patients with a borderline resectable cancer, or patients with a resectable cancer but who have other high-risk features, are ideal candidates to consider for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Among the high-risk features, a baseline elevated CA 19-9 concentration can be particularly useful, as its response trend during neoadjuvant chemotherapy can offer important insights into the prognosis after surgery. When selecting a neoadjuvant chemotherapy regimen, response data available for the use of FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine and nabpaclitaxel in the metastatic setting support their use in this space. FOLFIRINOX is perhaps the preferred regimen, given its proven adjuvant benefit and possibly its superior tumor response rate; still, patient tolerance and thus ability to complete recommended treatment must be carefully considered. This review presents the evidence supporting neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable pancreatic cancer, the factors to consider when making such a recommendation, the selection of specific regimens, and our institutional approach using these tools.

Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer

Patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) are best treated with surgical resection of the primary tumour and systemic chemotherapy, which provides considerably longer overall survival (OS) durations than either modality alone. Regardless, most patients will have disease relapse owing to micrometastatic disease. Although currently a matter of some debate, considerable research interest has been focused on the role of neoadjuvant therapy for all forms of resectable PDAC. Whilst adjuvant combination chemotherapy remains the standard of care for patients with resectable PDAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy seems to improve OS without necessarily increasing the resection rate in those with borderline-resectable disease. Furthermore, around 20% of patients with unresectable non-metastatic PDAC might undergo resection following 4-6 months of induction combination chemotherapy with or without radiotherapy, even in the absence of a clear radiological response, leading to improved OS outcomes in this group. Distinct molecular and biological responses to different types of therapies need to be better understood in order to enable the optimal sequencing of specific treatment modalities to further improve OS. In this Review, we describe current treatment strategies for the various clinical stages of PDAC and discuss developments that are likely to determine the optimal sequence of multimodality therapies by integrating the fundamental clinical and molecular features of the cancer.

Risks and benefits of pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients aged 80 years and over

PURPOSE

The frequency of pancreaticoduodenectomy is increasing in oldest old patients owing to population aging. We aimed to clarify the clinical significance of pancreaticoduodenectomy in patients aged ≥ 80 years with multiple underlying diseases.

METHODS

A total of 649 consecutive patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy from April 2010 to March 2021 in our institute were divided into two groups according to their age: ≥ 80 years (51) and ≤ 79 years (598). We compared mortality and morbidity between the groups. The age-related prognosis was analyzed in 302 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma treatment.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in morbidity (Clavien-Dindo classification grade III or higher; P = 0.1300), mortality (P = 0.0786), or postoperative hospital stay (P = 0.5763) between the groups. Patients aged ≥ 80 years, who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, had shorter overall survival than those aged ≤ 79 years (median survival time, 16.7 months vs. 32.7 months; P = 0.0206). However, the overall survival of patients aged ≥ 80 years who received perioperative chemotherapy was comparable to that of patients aged ≤ 79 years (P = 0.9795). In the multivariate analysis, the absence of perioperative chemotherapy was identified as an independent prognostic factor, while age ≥ 80 years was not. Perioperative chemotherapy was the sole independent prognostic factor in patients aged ≥ 80 years who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Pancreaticoduodenectomy is safe for patients aged ≥ 80 years. The survival benefits of pancreaticoduodenectomy for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma aged ≥ 80 years might be limited to those who can receive perioperative chemotherapy.

FOLFOX regimen after failure of fluorouracil and leucovorin plus nanoliposomal-irinotecan therapy for advanced pancreatic cancer: a retrospective observational study

BACKGROUND

Fluorouracil, leucovorin (5FU/LV), and nanoliposomal-irinotecan (nal-IRI) combination therapy has been established as the second-line treatment for advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. Oxaliplatin with 5FU/LV (FOLFOX) is often used as a subsequent treatment, although its efficacy and safety are yet to be fully elucidated. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX as a third- or later-line treatment for patients with advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre, retrospective study that enrolled 43 patients who received FOLFOX after failure of gemcitabine-based regimen followed by 5FU/LV + nal-IRI therapy between October 2020 and January 2022. FOLFOX therapy consisted of oxaliplatin (85 mg/m²), levo-leucovorin calcium (200 mg/m²) and 5-FU (2400 mg/m²) every 2 weeks per cycle. Overall survival, progression-free survival, objective response, and adverse events were evaluated.

RESULTS

At the median follow-up time of 3.9 months in all patients, the median overall survival and progression-free survival were 3.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.1-4.8) and 1.3 months (95% CI, 1.0-1.5), respectively. Response and disease control rates were 0 and 25.6%, respectively. The most common adverse event was anaemia in all grades followed by anorexia; the incidence of anorexia and grades 3 and 4 was 21 and 4.7%, respectively. Notably, grades 3-4 peripheral sensory neuropathy was not observed. Multivariable analysis revealed that a C-reactive protein (CRP) level of > 1.0 mg/dL was a poor prognostic factor for both progression-free survival and overall survival: hazard ratios were 2.037 (95% CI, 1.010-4.107; p = 0.047) and 2.471 (95% CI, 1.063-5.745; p = 0.036), respectively.

CONCLUSION

FOLFOX as a subsequent treatment after failure of second-line treatment with 5FU/LV + nal-IRI is tolerable, although its efficacy is limited, particularly in patients with high CRP levels.

Targeted therapy for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Mechanisms and clinical study

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive and lethal malignancy with a high rate of recurrence and a dismal 5-year survival rate. Contributing to the poor prognosis of PDAC is the lack of early detection, a complex network of signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms, a dense and desmoplastic stroma, and an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. A recent shift toward a neoadjuvant approach to treating PDAC has been sparked by the numerous benefits neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) has to offer compared with upfront surgery. However, certain aspects of NAT against PDAC, including the optimal regimen, the use of radiotherapy, and the selection of patients that would benefit from NAT, have yet to be fully elucidated. This review describes the major signaling pathways and molecular mechanisms involved in PDAC initiation and progression in addition to the immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment of PDAC. We then review current guidelines, ongoing research, and future research directions on the use of NAT based on randomized clinical trials and other studies. Finally, the current use of and research regarding targeted therapy for PDAC are examined. This review bridges the molecular understanding of PDAC with its clinical significance, development of novel therapies, and shifting directions in treatment paradigm.

DUPAN-2 as a Risk Factor of Early Recurrence After Curative Pancreatectomy for Patients With Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVES

Several patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) experience postoperative early recurrence (ER). We evaluated PDAC patients to identify the risk factors for postoperative ER (≤6 months), including preoperative serum DUPAN-2 level.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 74 PDAC patients who underwent pancreatectomy with curative intent. Clinicopathological factors including age, sex, body mass index, postoperative complications, pathological factors, preoperative C-reactive protein/albumin ratio, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio, modified Glasgow prognostic score, preoperative tumor markers (carcinoembryonic antigen, carbohydrate antigen 19-9, SPAN-1, and DUPAN-2), and history of adjuvant chemotherapy were investigated. Early recurrence risk factors were determined using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Recurrence and ER occurred in 52 (70.3%) and 23 (31.1%) patients, respectively. Univariate analysis revealed that postoperative complications, C-reactive protein/albumin ratio ≥0.02, neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio ≥3.01, carbohydrate antigen 19-9 ≥ 92.3 U/mL, SPAN-1 ≥ 69 U/mL, DUPAN-2 ≥ 200 U/mL, and absence of adjuvant chemotherapy were significant risk factors for ER. In multivariate analysis, DUPAN-2 ≥ 200 U/mL (P = 0.04) and absence of adjuvant chemotherapy (P = 0.02) were identified as independent risk factors for ER.

CONCLUSIONS

A higher level of preoperative DUPAN-2 was an independent risk factor for ER. For patients with high DUPAN-2 level, neoadjuvant therapies might be required to avoid ER.

Clinical Implications of FDG-PET in Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Therapy

PURPOSE

To evaluate the clinical significance of ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who underwent neoadjuvant therapy.

METHODS

Among 285 consecutive patients who underwent pancreatic resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma between 2015 and 2021, 86 who underwent preoperative ¹⁸F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography after completion of neoadjuvant treatment were reviewed. Among preoperative factors, including post-treatment maximum standardized uptake value, predictors of early recurrence and poor prognosis were identified using multivariate analysis for decision making in surgery.

RESULTS

Nineteen (22%) patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma demonstrated high maximum standardized uptake (≥ 4.5). High post-treatment maximum standardized uptake (≥ 4.5) predicted early recurrence within 6 months after surgery and correlated with shorter recurrence-free survival. Elevated post-treatment CA19-9 level (> 37 U/ml) and maximum standardized uptake ≥ 4.5 were independent prognostic factors. Post-treatment, a high maximum standardized uptake value indicated a poorer prognosis than a low maximum standardized uptake value in both patients with elevated CA19-9 and normal CA19-9 levels. The median overall survival in patients with elevated post-treatment CA19-9 and high maximum standardized uptake was only 17 months; 67% experienced early recurrence. Dynamic changes in maximum standardized uptake during neoadjuvant therapy were correlated with pathological response to neoadjuvant therapy, but not with radiological response or change in CA19-9 level.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-treatment assessment using maximum standardized uptake value is useful for stratifying patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma who will benefit from surgery. Instead of subsequent curative resection, additional neoadjuvant therapy should be considered in patients with a persistently high maximum standardized uptake value.

Immediate surgery compared with short-course neoadjuvant gemcitabine plus capecitabine, FOLFIRINOX, or chemoradiotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (ESPAC5): a four-arm, multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma have relatively low resection rates and poor survival despite the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. The aim of our study was to establish the feasibility and efficacy of three different types of short-course neoadjuvant therapy compared with immediate surgery.

METHODS

ESPAC5 (formerly known as ESPAC-5f) was a multicentre, open label, randomised controlled trial done in 16 pancreatic centres in two countries (UK and Germany). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1, biopsy proven pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic head, and were staged as having a borderline resectable tumour by contrast-enhanced CT criteria following central review. Participants were randomly assigned by means of minimisation to one of four groups: immediate surgery; neoadjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine (gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15, and oral capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice a day on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle for two cycles); neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, irinotecan 180 mg/m2, folinic acid given according to local practice, and fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 bolus injection on days 1 and 15 followed by 2400 mg/m2 46 h intravenous infusion given on days 1 and 15, repeated every 2 weeks for four cycles); or neoadjuvant capecitabine-based chemoradiation (total dose 50·4 Gy in 28 daily fractions over 5·5 weeks [1·8 Gy per fraction, Monday to Friday] with capecitabine 830 mg/m2 twice daily [Monday to Friday] throughout radiotherapy). Patients underwent restaging contrast-enhanced CT at 4-6 weeks after neoadjuvant therapy and underwent surgical exploration if the tumour was still at least borderline resectable. All patients who had their tumour resected received adjuvant therapy at the oncologist's discretion. Primary endpoints were recruitment rate and resection rate. Analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, 89500674, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 3, 2014, and Dec 20, 2018, from 478 patients screened, 90 were randomly assigned to a group (33 to immediate surgery, 20 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 20 to FOLFIRINOX, and 17 to capecitabine-based chemoradiation); four patients were excluded from the intention-to-treat analysis (one in the capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy withdrew consent before starting therapy and three [two in the immediate surgery group and one in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group] were found to be ineligible after randomisation). 44 (80%) of 55 patients completed neoadjuvant therapy. The recruitment rate was 25·92 patients per year from 16 sites; 21 (68%) of 31 patients in the immediate surgery and 30 (55%) of 55 patients in the combined neoadjuvant therapy groups underwent resection (p=0·33). R0 resection was achieved in three (14%) of 21 patients in the immediate surgery group and seven (23%) of 30 in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined (p=0·49). Surgical complications were observed in 29 (43%) of 68 patients who underwent surgery; no patients died within 30 days. 46 (84%) of 55 patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy were available for restaging. Six (13%) of 46 had a partial response. Median follow-up time was 12·2 months (95% CI 12·0-12·4). 1-year overall survival was 39% (95% CI 24-61) for immediate surgery, 78% (60-100) for gemcitabine plus capecitabine, 84% (70-100) for FOLFIRINOX, and 60% (37-97) for capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy (p=0·0028). 1-year disease-free survival from surgery was 33% (95% CI 19-58) for immediate surgery and 59% (46-74) for the combined neoadjuvant therapies (hazard ratio 0·53 [95% CI 0·28-0·98], p=0·016). Three patients reported local disease recurrence (two in the immediate surgery group and one in the FOLFIRINOX group). 78 (91%) patients were included in the safety set and assessed for toxicity events. 19 (24%) of 78 patients reported a grade 3 or worse adverse event (two [7%] of 28 patients in the immediate surgery group and 17 [34%] of 50 patients in the neoadjuvant therapy groups combined), the most common of which were neutropenia, infection, and hyperglycaemia.

INTERPRETATION

Recruitment was challenging. There was no significant difference in resection rates between patients who underwent immediate surgery and those who underwent neoadjuvant therapy. Short-course (8 week) neoadjuvant therapy had a significant survival benefit compared with immediate surgery. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy with either gemcitabine plus capecitabine or FOLFIRINOX had the best survival compared with immediate surgery. These findings support the use of short-course neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

FUNDING

Cancer Research UK.

Validation of the Anatomical and Biological Definitions of Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer According to the 2017 International Consensus for Survival and Recurrence in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma Undergoing Upfront Surgery

BACKGROUND

The International Consensus Criteria (ICC) (2017) redefined patients with borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) according to anatomical, biological, and conditional aspects. However, these new criteria have not been validated comprehensively. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to validate the anatomical and biological definitions of BR-PDAC for oncological outcomes in patients with resectable (R) and BR-PDAC undergoing upfront surgery.

METHODS

A total of 404 patients who underwent upfront surgery for R- and BR-PDAC from 2004 to 2020 were included. The patients were classified according to the ICC as follows: resectable (R) (n = 259), anatomical borderline (BR-A) (n = 43), biological borderline (BR-B) (n = 81), and anatomical and biologic borderline (BR-AB) (n = 21).

RESULTS

Compared with the R and BR-B groups, the BR-A and BR-AB groups had higher postoperative complication rates (16.5% and 27.2% vs 32.5% and 33.4%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower R0 resection rates (85.7% and 80.2% vs 65.1% and 61.9%; P = 0.003). In contrast, compared with the R and BR-A groups, the BR-B (32.1%) and BR-AB (57.1%) groups had higher early recurrence rates (within postoperative 6 months) (16.5% and 25.6% vs 32.1% and 57.1%; P < 0.001) and significantly lower 3-year recurrence-free survival rates (36.1% and 20.7% vs 12.1% and 7.8%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Anatomically defined BR-PDAC was associated with a higher risk of margin-positive resection and postoperative complication rates, while biologically defined BR-PDAC was associated with higher early recurrence rates and lower survival rates. Thus, the anatomical and biological definitions are useful in predicting the prognosis and determining the usefulness of neoadjuvant therapy.

Role of neoadjuvant treatment in resectable pancreatic cancer according to vessel invasion and increase of CA19-9 levels

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE

The efficacy of neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for resectable pancreatic cancer remains debatable, particularly in patients with portal vein (PV)/superior mesenteric vein (SMV) contact and elevated serum carbohydrate antigen (CA) 19-9. This study investigated the clinical significance of PV/SMV contact and CA19-9 levels, and the role of NAT in resectable pancreatic cancer.

METHODS

A total of 775 patients who underwent surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer between 2007 and 2018 were included. Propensity score-matched (PSM) analysis (1:3) was performed based on tumor size, lymph node enlargement, and PV/SMV contact. Subgroup analyses were performed according to PV/SMV contact and CA19-9 level.

RESULTS

Among the patients, 52 underwent NAT and 723 underwent upfront surgery. After PSM, NAT group showed better survival than upfront surgery group (median 30.0 vs 22.0 months, P = .047). In patients with PV/SMV contact, NAT tended to have better survival (30.0 vs 22.0 months, P = .069). CA19-9 >150 U/mL was a poor prognostic factor, with NAT showing a significant survival difference compared with upfront surgery (34.0 vs 18.0 months, P = .004).

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant treatment showed better survival than upfront surgery in resectable pancreatic cancer. In patients with PV/SMV contact or CA19-9 >150 U/mL, NAT showed a survival difference compared to upfront surgery; therefore, NAT could be considered in these patients.

Efficacy of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy followed by pancreatic resection for older patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

BACKGROUND

The benefit of preoperative treatment followed by pancreatic resection in older patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains unclear. In this retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, we evaluated the significance and safety of preoperative treatment followed by curative resection for older PDAC patients.

METHODS

We evaluated 122 patients with resectable and borderline resectable PDAC who received neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) followed by curative resection between 2009 and 2019. Changes in the prognostic nutritional indices during NACRT, surgical outcomes, and prognosis were compared between older (≥75 years, n = 44) and younger patients (<75 years, n = 78).

RESULTS

The completion rate, adverse event rate, changes in prognostic nutritional indices during NACRT, and prognosis were similar between the groups. In multivariate analysis, an elevated C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CRP/Alb) ≥ 33.1% during NACRT (p = 0.035) and no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy (p = 0.041) were identified as significant predictors of overall survival.

CONCLUSIONS

NACRT followed by pancreatic resection could be safely performed in older patients, with a similar prognosis as that of younger patients, despite an increased frequency of postoperative complications. Elevated CRP/Alb during NACRT and no postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy were poor prognostic factors for older patients.

Surgeon-Led Clinical Trials in Pancreatic Cancer

The review also highlights key landmark adjuvant, neoadjuvant and perioperative trials with an emphasis on surgeon-run clinical trials that have helped to define the pancreatic cancer treatment paradigms.

Current Treatment of Potentially Resectable Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Medical Oncologist's Perspective

Pancreatic cancer has traditionally been associated with a dismal prognosis, even in early stages of the disease. In recent years, the introduction of newer generation chemotherapy regimens in the adjuvant setting has improved the survival of patients treated with upfront resection. However, there are multiple theoretical advantages to deliver early systemic therapy in patients with localized pancreatic cancer. So far, the evidence supports the use of neoadjuvant therapy for patients with borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. The benefit of this treatment sequence for patients with resectable disease remains elusive. In this review, we summarize the data on adjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer and describe which evidence backs the use of neoadjuvant therapy. Additionally, we address important issues faced in clinical practice when treating patients with localized pancreatic cancer.

Borderline Resectable Pancreatic Cancer: Challenges for Clinical Management

Background

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains a significant worldwide health problem with a poor prognosis. A borderline resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (BR-PDAC) is a tumor with limited vascular involvement that is technically resectable but with a high risk of positive margins (R1 resection).

Objective

To identify the current challenges that exist in the management of BR-PDAC.

Methods

A review of the literature was conducted to identify articles discussing the definitions and management of BR-PDAC.

Key Findings

Several anatomic definitions of BR-PDAC exist, and there is significant heterogeneity in their utilization across published trials. To improve the odds of a margin negative (R0) resection, a neoadjuvant treatment approach involving chemotherapy with or without radiation is currently preferred. While supporting the efficacy of a neoadjuvant approach in BR-PDAC, the largest published randomized trials have utilized older gemcitabine-based regimens. Recently published Phase II evidence and meta-analyses have supported the use of modern multi-agent regimens such as FOLFIRINOX. The utility of adding radiation to a chemotherapy backbone remains in question. Due to remnant fibrosis and edema following neoadjuvant therapy, accurately selecting patients for resection based on a restaging CT scan is challenging. Furthermore, the role of adjuvant therapy in BR-PDAC patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy needs to be defined.

Conclusion

Though progress has been made, the optimal management of BR-PDAC is uncertain. Phase III trials utilizing modern chemotherapeutic regimens are needed to establish a standard of care.

Routine neoadjuvant chemotherapy for all patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma? A review of the evidence

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is an aggressive malignancy that carries a poor prognosis because the majority of patients present with locally advanced or metastatic disease. However, even patients who are fortunate enough to present with resectable disease are often plagued by high recurrence rates. While adjuvant chemotherapy has been shown to decrease the risk of recurrence after surgery, post operative complications and poor performance status after surgery prevent up to 50% of patients from receiving it. Given the benefits of neoadjuvant therapy in patients with borderline resectable disease, it is understandable that neoadjuvant therapy has been steadily increasing in patients with resectable cancers as well. In this review paper, we highlight the rational and existing evidence of using neoadjuvant therapy in all patients with resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

The outcome of a multidisciplinary approach incorporating neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with S1 for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma

Aim

This study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of a multidisciplinary approach incorporating neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy with S1 (S1-NACRT) for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

Methods

The medical records of 132 patients who received S1-NACRT for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from 2010 to 2019 were reviewed. The S1-NACRT regimen consisted of S1 at a dose of 80-120 mg/body/day together with 1.8 Gy of radiation in 28 fractions. The patients were re-evaluated 4 weeks after S1-NACRT completion, and a pancreatectomy was then considered.

Results

Adverse events of S1-NACRT ≥grade 3 occurred in 22.7% of the patients, and 1.5% discontinued therapy. Of the 112 patients who underwent a pancreatectomy, 109 underwent R0 resection. Adjuvant chemotherapy with relative dose intensity ≥50% was administered to 74.1% of the patients who underwent resection. The median overall survival of all patients was 47 months, and the median overall survival and recurrence-free survival of patients who underwent resection was 71 and 32 months, respectively. According to the multivariate analyses of prognostic factors for overall survival in patients who underwent resection, negative margin status (hazard ratio: 0.182; P = 0.006) and relative dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy ≥50% (hazard ratio 0.294; P < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors of overall survival.

Conclusions

A multidisciplinary approach incorporating S1-NACRT for resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma demonstrated acceptable tolerability and good local control and resulted in comparable survival benefits.

Pancreatic cancer - the past, the present, and the future

BACKGROUND

Pancreatic cancer has been and still is associated with a very poor prognosis. This is due to a lack of major breakthroughs with respect to early diagnosis, prognostication, prediction, as well as novel, targeted therapies. The benefits of surgery and chemotherapy are evident, but the fact that only some 10% of all patients have early, localized disease highlights the unmet need for new early detection methods. An improved understanding of tumor biology and the development of molecular markers detectable both in the circulation and in cancer tissues may underlie the development of new tools for optimizing both diagnosis and treatment.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Review of the literature.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

If we do not improve precision oncology for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, the prognosis will still remain dismal and the" burden" on society will increase substantially.

Impact of pathological complete response following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (gemcitabine, nab-paclitaxel, S-1) and radiation for borderline resectable pancreatic cancer: a case report and review of literature

Background

Pancreatic cancer (PC) is a highly lethal malignancy, even if surgical resection is possible (median survival: < 30 months). The prognosis of borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (BR-PC) is even worse. There is no clear consensus on the optimal treatment strategy, including pre/postoperative therapy, for BR-PC. We report a patient with BR-PC who achieved clinical partial response with neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy (NACRT) and underwent curative resection, resulting in pathological complete response (pCR).

Case presentation

A 71-year-old man with jaundice and liver dysfunction was referred to our department because of a 48-mm hypo-vascular mass in the pancreatic head with obstruction of the pancreatic and bile ducts and infiltration of superior mesenteric vein and portal vein. The lesion was identified as atypical cells which suggested adenocarcinoma by biopsy, and he was administered NACRT: gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel, following S-1 and intensity modulated radiation therapy. After reduction in the tumor size (clinical partial response), pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed, and pCR achieved. Postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy with S-1 was initially administered and the patient is currently alive with no recurrence as of 2 years after surgery.

Conclusions

NACRT is a potentially useful treatment for BR-PC that may lead to pCR and help improve prognosis.

Prognostic Significance of Intraoperative Peritoneal Lavage Cytology in Patients with Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Single-Center Experience and Systematic Review of the Literature

BACKGROUND

The prognostic significance of peritoneal lavage cytology (PLC) in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic impact of PLC status in PDAC patients.

METHODS

Patients intending to undergo resection for PDAC between 2007 and 2020 were included. Survival was compared among patients who underwent resection with negative or positive PLC status and those who did not undergo resection. Univariable and multivariable analyses were conducted to evaluate the prognostic impact of positive PLC status. A systematic literature review was performed to evaluate the correlation between prognosis and the positive PLC rate.

RESULTS

A total of 480 patients formed the study cohort and were divided as follows: 438 in the negative PLC group, 18 in the positive PLC group, and 24 in the no resection group. Although the median survival time significantly differed between the negative and positive PLC groups (35.7 vs. 13.6 months, P < 0.001), it did not significantly differ between the positive PLC and no resection groups (13.6 vs. 12.2 months, P = 0.605). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that positive PLC status (hazard ratio = 3.54, 95% confidence interval = 1.97-6.38, P < 0.001) was the strongest poor prognostic factor. Based on statistical analyses for the systematic review, the prognostic impact of positive PLC status weakened significantly as the institutional positive PLC rate increased (P = 0.044).

CONCLUSIONS

Resection did not improve the prognosis of patients with positive PLC status in our cohort. The institutional positive PLC rate may be a good reference for surgical indication in these patients.

Trial sequential analysis of randomized controlled trials on neoadjuvant therapy for resectable pancreatic cancer

INTRODUCTION

Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) provide the highest level of evidence but can suffer from type I (false-positive) and II (false-negative) errors, which can be estimated through trial sequential analysis (TSA) demonstrating eventual credibility of results. Aim of the study was to establish through TSA which strategy between neoadjuvant approach or upfront surgery provides best results when treating potentially resectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

RCTs were searched until September 2021. Intention-to-treat (ITT) overall survival, resection rate, ITT R0 and N0 rates and per-protocol R0 and N0 rates were the outcomes considered. Fixed-effect model was applied. TSA assumed an alpha = 5% and a power = 80%.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were identified accruing 325 patients for the ITT analyses and 242 for the per-protocol analyses. Neoadjuvant did not improve survival (p = 0.167) and TSA supported that this result was underpowered, requiring additional 1514 patients to prove credibility. Neoadjuvant reduced resection rate (p = 0.044) but type I error was not avoided. Neoadjuvant credibly increased per-protocol R0 and N0 rates (p = 0.003 and p < 0.001), and TSA showed that these were true-positive findings. Neoadjuvant did not increase ITT R0 rate since randomization (p = 0.169) but TSA showed lack of power. Neoadjuvant credibly increased the ITT N0 rate (p < 0.001) and TSA supported that this was a true positive finding.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant strategy credibly demonstrated superiority over upfront surgery in determine per-protocol R0 resection and N0 rates, as well as ITT N0 rate. For the remaining outcomes, TSA suggested the need of larger samples to exclude type I and II errors.

Optimal lymph-node dissection for pancreatic tail cancer

PURPOSE

The optimal range of lymph-node dissection for pancreatic tail cancer remains unclear. We investigated the location and frequency of lymph-node metastases to identify the correct range of lymph-node dissection for pancreatic tail cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed clinical data retrospectively, on patients who underwent distal pancreatectomy for resectable left-sided pancreatic cancer, between February, 2006 and March, 2021. Eligible patients were divided into two groups according to the tumor location: those with pancreatic tail cancer (Pt group) and those with pancreatic body or body and tail cancer (non-Pt group).

RESULTS

Of the 96 patients analyzed, 61 (64%) were assigned to the Pt group and 35 (36%) were assigned to the non-Pt group. Metastases to stations 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 14, and 18 were found in 0 (0%), 0 (0%), 0 (0%), 4 (7%), 18 (30%), 2 (4%), and 10 (17%) patients in the Pt group, and in 1 (3%), 4 (12%), 2 (6%), 1 (3%), 18 (51%), 3 (9%), and 6 (17%) patients in the non-Pt group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Lymph-node dissection at stations 7, 8, and 9 might not be necessary in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer confined to the pancreatic tail.

Reevaluation of regional lymph nodes in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma in the pancreatic body and tail

Introduction

In patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) in the pancreatic body (Pb) and tail (Pt), the appropriate area for lymphadenectomy is controversial. This study aimed to reevaluate the extent of lymph node (LN) metastasis in Pb- and Pt-PDAC, and to define the optimal area of LN dissection.

Patients and methods

This single-center retrospective study evaluated patients with Pb- and Pt-PDAC who underwent distal pancreatectomy with extended lymphadenectomy between 2006 and 2020. LN metastasis in >3.0% of patients were defined as new regional LN.

Results

The study cohort included 135 patients with Pb-PDAC and 42 patients with Pt-PDAC. In patients with Pb-PDAC, LNs around the splenic artery (SPA) had the highest metastasis-positive rate (54.1%). LNs along the left gastric artery, common hepatic artery, celiac axis (CA), superior mesenteric artery (SMA), and splenic hilus were defined as new regional LNs. In patients with Pt-PDAC, LNs at the splenic hilum had the highest metastasis-positive rate (38.1%). The station and LN around the SPA were defined as new regional LNs in those with Pt-PDAC. Metastasis beyond the newly defined regional LNs was not associated with survival. The incidence of LN metastasis was lower in patients who received preoperative chemotherapy than in those who underwent upfront surgery in both Pb- and Pt-PDAC.

Conclusion

Although it needs to be verified in future multicenter studies, LN of both the CA and SMA systems should be dissected in patients with Pb-PDAC. However, only those around the SPA and splenic hilus should be dissected routinely in those with Pt-PDAC.

Current status and future perspectives of clinical research in pancreatic cancer: Establishment of evidence by science

Pancreatic cancer is one of the most aggressive diseases in the world due to a lack of early detection, leading to an overall 5-year survival of only 10%. In recent years, clinical trials targeted pancreatic cancer in efforts to improve survival. These studies introduce new technologies, concepts, and evidence which have instilled new optimism for improving prognosis. This review summarizes the current status of the recent (5-year) clinical trials and describes contemporary research on pancreatic cancer, including surgical technology, diagnostic skills, traditional chemoradiotherapy, neoadjuvant chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, and precision medicine. Then, the future trend and direction of clinical trials on pancreatic cancer are discussed.