A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blinded, Clinical Trial Comparing Cattell-Warren and Blumgart Anastomoses Following Partial Pancreatoduodenectomy: PANasta Trial.

Whether a Blumgart anastomosis (BA) is superior to Cattell-Warren anastomosis (CWA) in terms of postoperative pancreatic fistula (POPF) following pancreatoduodenectomy. Importance: Complications driven by POPF following pancreatic cancer resection may hinder adjuvant therapy, shortening survival. BA may reduce complications compared to CWA, improving the use of adjuvant therapy and prolonging survival. Methods: A multicenter double-blind, controlled trial of patients undergoing resection for suspected pancreatic head cancer, randomized during surgery to a BA or CWA, stratified by pancreatic consistency and duct diameter. The primary end point was POPF, and secondary outcome measures were adjuvant therapy use, specified surgical complications, quality of life, and survival from the date of randomization. For a 10% POPF reduction, 416 patients were required, 208 per arm (two-sided α = 0·05; power = 80%). Results: Z-score at planned interim analysis was 0.474 so recruitment was held to 238 patients; 236 patients were analyzed (112 BA and 124 CWA). No significant differences in POPF were observed between BA and CWA, odds ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) 1·04 (0.58-1.88), P = 0.887, nor in serious adverse events. Adjuvant therapy was delivered to 98 (62%) of 159 eligible patients with any malignancy; statistically unrelated to arm or postoperative complications. Twelve-month overall survival, hazard ratio (95% CI), did not differ between anastomoses; BA 0.787 (0.713-0.868) and CWA 0.854 (0.792-0.921), P = 0.266, nor for the 58 patients with complications, median (IQR), 0.83 (0.74-0.91) compared to 101 patients without complications 0.82 (0.76-0.89) (P = 0.977). Conclusions: PANasta represents the most robust analysis of BA versus CWA to date.

Recent advances in understanding pancreatic cancer.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an intractable cancer and a leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide. Over 90% of patients die within 1 year of diagnosis. Deaths from PDAC are increasing and it remains a cancer of substantial unmet need. A number of factors contribute to its poor prognosis: namely, late presentation, early metastases and limited systemic therapy options because of chemoresistance. A variety of research approaches underway are aimed at improving patient survival. Here, we review high-risk groups and efforts for early detection. We examine recent developments in the understanding of complex molecular and metabolic alterations which accompany PDAC. We explore artificial intelligence and biological targets for therapy and examine the role of tumour stroma and the immune microenvironment. We also review recent developments with respect to the PDAC microbiome. It is hoped that current research efforts will translate into earlier diagnosis, improvements in treatment and better outcomes for patients.

Chemotherapy-induced infiltration of neutrophils promotes pancreatic cancer metastasis via Gas6/AXL signalling axis.

OBJECTIVE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly metastatic disease and cytotoxic chemotherapy is the standard of care treatment for patients with advanced disease. Here, we investigate how the microenvironment in PDAC liver metastases reacts to chemotherapy and its role in metastatic disease progression post-treatment, an area which is poorly understood. DESIGN: The impact of chemotherapy on metastatic disease progression and immune cell infiltrates was characterised using flow and mass cytometry combined with transcriptional and histopathological analysis in experimental PDAC liver metastases mouse models. Findings were validated in patient derived liver metastases and in an autochthonous PDAC mouse model. Human and murine primary cell cocultures and ex vivo patient-derived liver explants were deployed to gain mechanistical insights on whether and how chemotherapy affects the metastatic tumour microenvironment. RESULTS: We show that in vivo, chemotherapy induces an initial infiltration of proinflammatory macrophages into the liver and activates cytotoxic T cells, leading only to a temporary restraining of metastatic disease progression. However, after stopping treatment, neutrophils are recruited to the metastatic liver via CXCL1 and 2 secretion by metastatic tumour cells. These neutrophils express growth arrest specific 6 (Gas6) which leads to AXL receptor activation on tumour cells enabling their regrowth. Disruption of neutrophil infiltration or inhibition of the Gas6/AXL signalling axis in combination with chemotherapy inhibits metastatic growth. Chemotherapy increases Gas6 expression in circulating neutrophils from patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and recombinant Gas6 is sufficient to promote tumour cell proliferation ex vivo, in patient-derived metastatic liver explants. CONCLUSION: Combining chemotherapy with Gas6/AXL or neutrophil targeted therapy could provide a therapeutic benefit for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Postpancreatectomy Acute Pancreatitis (PPAP): Definition and Grading From the International Study Group for Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

OBJECTIVE: The ISGPS aimed to develop a universally accepted definition for PPAP for standardized reporting and outcome comparison. BACKGROUND: PPAP is an increasingly recognized complication after partial pancreatic resections, but its incidence and clinical impact, and even its existence are variable because an internationally accepted consensus definition and grading system are lacking. METHODS: The ISGPS developed a consensus definition and grading of PPAP with its members after an evidence review and after a series of discussions and multiple revisions from April 2020 to May 2021. RESULTS: We defined PPAP as an acute inflammatory condition of the pancreatic remnant beginning within the first 3 postoperative days after a partial pancreatic resection. The diagnosis requires (1) a sustained postoperative serum hyperamylasemia (POH) greater than the institutional upper limit of normal for at least the first 48 hours postoperatively, (2) associated with clinically relevant features, and (3) radiologic alterations consistent with PPAP. Three different PPAP grades were defined based on the clinical impact: (1) grade postoperative hyperamylasemia, biochemical changes only; (2) grade B, mild or moderate complications; and (3) grade C, severe life-threatening complications. DISCUSSIONS: The present definition and grading scale of PPAP, based on biochemical, radiologic, and clinical criteria, are instrumental for a better understanding of PPAP and the spectrum of postoperative complications related to this emerging entity. The current terminology will serve as a reference point for standard assessment and lend itself to developing specific treatments and prevention strategies.

hENT1 Predicts Benefit from Gemcitabine in Pancreatic Cancer but Only with Low CDA mRNA.

Gemcitabine or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based treatments can be selected for pancreatic cancer. Equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (hENT1) predicts adjuvant gemcitabine treatment benefit over 5-FU. Cytidine deaminase (CDA), inside or outside of the cancer cell, will deaminate gemcitabine, altering transporter affinity. ESPAC-3(v2) was a pancreatic cancer trial comparing adjuvant gemcitabine and 5-FU. Tissue microarray sections underwent in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. Analysis of both CDA and hENT1 was possible with 277 patients. The transcript did not correlate with protein levels for either marker. High hENT1 protein was prognostic with gemcitabine; median overall survival was 26.0 v 16.8 months (p = 0.006). Low CDA transcript was prognostic regardless of arm; 24.8 v 21.2 months with gemcitabine (p = 0.02) and 26.4 v 14.6 months with 5-FU (p = 0.02). Patients with low hENT1 protein did better with 5-FU, but only if the CDA transcript was low (median survival of 5-FU v gemcitabine; 29.3 v 18.3 months, compared with 14.2 v 14.6 with high CDA). CDA mRNA is an independent prognostic biomarker. When added to hENT1 protein status, it may also provide treatment-specific predictive information and, within the frame of a personalized treatment strategy, guide to either gemcitabine or 5FU for the individual patient.

Cost analysis and outcomes of endoscopic, minimal access and open pancreatic necrosectomy.

OBJECTIVES: To assess both individual patient and institutional costs as well as outcomes in patients with pancreatic necrosis who underwent either endoscopic, minimal access or open pancreatic necrosectomy. These data can be used to evaluate clinical effectiveness with a view to informing local health care providers. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Intervention for infected pancreatic necrosis is associated with a high morbidity, mortality and long hospital stays. Minimal access surgical step-up approaches have been the gold standard of care, however endoscopic approaches are now offered preferentially. METHODS: All patients undergoing endoscopic (EN), minimal access retroperitoneal (MARPN) and open (OPN) necrosectomy at a single institution from April 2015-March 2017 were included. Patients were selected for intervention based on morphology and position of the necrosis and on clinical factors. Patient level costing systems were used to determine inpatient and outpatient costs. RESULTS: 86 patients were included: 38 underwent EN, 35 MARPN and 13 OPN. Pre-operative APACHEII was 6 vs 9 vs 9 (p=0.017) and CRP 107 vs 204 vs 278, (p=0.012), respectively. Post-operative stay was 19 days for EN vs. 41 for MARPN vs. 42 for OPN (p=0.007). Complications occurred in 68.4%, 68.6% and 46.2% (p=0.298) while mortality was 10.5%, 22.9% and 15.4% (p=0.379) respectively. Mean total cost was £31,364 for EN, £52,770 for MARPN (p=0.008) and £60,346 for OPN. Ward and critical care costs for EN were lower than for MARPN (ward: £9,430 vs. £14,033, p=0.024; critical care: £5,317 vs. £16,648, p=0.056).

The in situ near-total pancreatectomy (LIVOCADO procedure) for end-staged chronic pancreatitis.

PURPOSE: Total pancreatectomy for severe pain in end-stage chronic pancreatitis may be the only option, but with vascular involvement, this is usually too high risk and/or technically not feasible. The purpose of the study was to present the clinical outcomes of a novel procedure in severe chronic pancreatitis complicated by uncontrollable pain and vascular involvement. METHODS: We describe an in situ near-total pancreatectomy that avoids peripancreatic vascular dissection (Livocado procedure) and report on surgical and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: The Livocado procedure was carried out on 18 (3.9%) of 465 patients undergoing surgery for chronic pancreatitis. There were 13 men and 5 women with a median (IQR) age of 48.5 (42.4-57) years and weight of 60.7 (58.0-75.0) kg. All had severe pain and vascular involvement; 17 had pancreatic parenchymal calcification; the median (IQR) oral morphine equivalent dose requirement was 86 (33-195) mg/day. The median (IQR) maximal pain scores were 9 (9-10); the average pain score was 6 (IQR 4-7). There was no peri-operative or 90-day mortality. At a median (IQR) follow-up of 32.5 (21-45.75) months, both maximal and average pain scores were significantly improved post-operatively, and at 12 months, two-thirds of patients were completely pain free. Six (33%) patients had employment pre-operatively versus 13 (72%) post-operatively (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The Livocado procedure was safe and carried out successfully in patients with chronic pancreatitis with vascular involvement where other procedures would be contraindicated. Perioperative outcomes, post-operative pain scores, and employment rehabilitation were comparable with other procedures carried out in patients without vascular involvement.

Single port retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy for the treatment of extra-pancreatic walled off necrotic collections.

Single Port Retroperitoneal Pancreatic Necrosectomy (SPRPN), a novel method to debride extra-pancreatic necrosis after failed conventional treatment, was undertaken in 7 patients with a median collection diameter of 98 x 85 x 124mm, with resolution at a median of 42 days and post-operative median stay of 47 days.

International consensus guidelines on surveillance for pancreatic cancer in chronic pancreatitis. Recommendations from the working group for the international consensus guidelines for chronic pancreatitis in collaboration with the International Association of Pancreatology, the American Pancreatic Association, the Japan Pancreas Society, and European Pancreatic Club.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chronic pancreatitis (CP) have an increased risk of pancreatic cancer. We present the international consensus guidelines for surveillance of pancreatic cancer in CP. METHODS: The international group evaluated 10 statements generated from evidence on 5 questions relating to pancreatic cancer in CP. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the level of evidence available per statement. The working group voted on each statement for strength of agreement, using a nine-point Likert scale in order to calculate Cronbach's alpha reliability coefficient. RESULTS: In the following domains there was strong consensus: (1) the risk of pancreatic cancer in affected individuals with hereditary pancreatitis due to inherited PRSS1 mutations is high enough to justify surveillance; (2) the risk of pancreatic cancer in patients with CP associated with SPINK1 p. N34S is not high enough to justify surveillance; (3) surveillance should be undertaken in pancreatic specialist centers; (4) surveillance should only be introduced after the age of 40 years and stopped when the patient would no longer be suitable for surgical intervention. All patients with CP should be advised to lead a healthy lifestyle aimed at avoiding risk factors for progression of CP and pancreatic cancer. There was only moderate or weak agreement on the best methods of screening and surveillance in other types of environmental, familial and genetic forms of CP. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with inherited PRSS1 mutations should undergo surveillance for pancreatic cancer, but the best methods for cancer detection need further investigation.

Management of the pancreatic transection plane after left (distal) pancreatectomy: Expert consensus guidelines by the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery (ISGPS).

BACKGROUND: The aim was to evaluate the various operative techniques and outcomes used to manage the pancreatic transection plane (or stump) during a left (distal) pancreatectomy and to develop expert consensus guidelines. METHODS: Evidence-based, clinically relevant questions were discussed and then were circulated among members of the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery. After agreement on the questions and statements, voting in a 9-point Likert scale was used to gauge the level of objective support for each. RESULTS: Studies using the International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery definition of postoperative pancreatic fistula including 16 randomized trials were reviewed to generate a series of statements set into 14 domains. There was strong consensus in the following statements: there was no difference in the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate after left pancreatectomy between the handsewn and stapler techniques; a stapling technique could not be used in all cases of left pancreatectomy; the use of an energy-based tissue sealant or a chemical sealant device or combinations of these did not impact the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate; there was no difference in the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate between the open, laparoscopic, or robotic approaches; and there are 1 or more clinically important, patient-related risk factors associated with the postoperative pancreatic fistula rate. There was weak or conditional agreement on the use of prophylactic somatostatin analogs, stents, stump closure, stump anastomosis, and the role of abdominal drains. CONCLUSION: Areas of strong consensus suggests a change in clinical practice and priority setting. Eight domains with lower agreement will require novel approaches and large multicenter studies to determine future key areas of practice.

Patterns of Recurrence After Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Secondary Analysis of the ESPAC-4 Randomized Adjuvant Chemotherapy Trial.

Importance: The patterns of disease recurrence after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with adjuvant chemotherapy remain unclear. Objective: To define patterns of recurrence after adjuvant chemotherapy and the association with survival. Design, Setting, and Participants: Prospectively collected data from the phase 3 European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer 4 adjuvant clinical trial, an international multicenter study. The study included 730 patients who had resection and adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer. Data were analyzed between July 2017 and May 2019. Interventions: Randomization to adjuvant gemcitabine or gemcitabine plus capecitabine. Main Outcomes and Measures: Overall survival, recurrence, and sites of recurrence. Results: Of the 730 patients, median age was 65 years (range 37-81 years), 414 were men (57%), and 316 were women (43%). The median follow-up time from randomization was 43.2 months (95% CI, 39.7-45.5 months), with overall survival from time of surgery of 27.9 months (95% CI, 24.8-29.9 months) with gemcitabine and 30.2 months (95% CI, 25.8-33.5 months) with the combination (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.68-0.98; P = .03). The 5-year survival estimates were 17.1% (95% CI, 11.6%-23.5%) and 28.0% (22.0%-34.3%), respectively. Recurrence occurred in 479 patients (65.6%); another 78 patients (10.7%) died without recurrence. Local recurrence occurred at a median of 11.63 months (95% CI, 10.05-12.19 months), significantly different from those with distant recurrence with a median of 9.49 months (95% CI, 8.44-10.71 months) (HR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.01-1.45; P = .04). Following recurrence, the median survival was 9.36 months (95% CI, 8.08-10.48 months) for local recurrence and 8.94 months (95% CI, 7.82-11.17 months) with distant recurrence (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.73-1.09; P = .27). The median overall survival of patients with distant-only recurrence (23.03 months; 95% CI, 19.55-25.85 months) or local with distant recurrence (23.82 months; 95% CI, 17.48-28.32 months) was not significantly different from those with only local recurrence (24.83 months; 95% CI, 22.96-27.63 months) (P = .85 and P = .35, respectively). Gemcitabine plus capecitabine had a 21% reduction of death following recurrence compared with monotherapy (HR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.64-0.98; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: There were no significant differences between the time to recurrence and subsequent and overall survival between local and distant recurrence. Pancreatic cancer behaves as a systemic disease requiring effective systemic therapy after resection. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00058201, EudraCT 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN 96397434.

The Impact of Positive Resection Margins on Survival and Recurrence Following Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies. METHODS: Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1 mm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1 mm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.

Role of Radiological Imaging in the Diagnosis and Characterization of Pancreatic Cystic Lesions: A Systematic Review.

The evidence on the ability of radiological tests to predict a specific diagnosis and also their aptitude in identifying pathological markers indicative of malignancy in cystic lesions of the pancreas remains inconclusive. We conducted a systematic review on MEDLINE for the use of computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging, and positron emission tomography/CT (PET/CT) in the diagnosis and characterization of these cysts. The accuracy of CT scan for reaching a specific diagnosis was 39% to 61.4%, whereas its accuracy for differentiating benign from malignant lesions was 61.9% to 80%. Magnetic resonance imaging showed a better accuracy in identifying a specific diagnosis of 50% to 86%, whereas its accuracy in differentiating benign from malignant lesions was 55.6% to 87%. The use of magnetic resonance imaging was superior to CT scan in identifying septations, mural nodules, and ductal communication. The sensitivity of PET/CT in diagnosing malignancy was 85.7% to 100% with a reported accuracy of 88% to 95%. The evidence gathered from this review suggests that the adequacy of CT imaging in full characterization of pancreatic cysts is suboptimal, and therefore a low threshold for supplementary imaging is advised. The use of PET/CT should be considered in high-risk patients with equivocal findings.

The diagnostic value of Rosemont and Japanese diagnostic criteria for 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible' and 'early' chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal data are lacking to support consensus criteria for diagnosing early chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Retrospective single centre study of the initial evidence for chronic pancreatitis (CP), with reassessment after follow-up (January 2003-November 2016). RESULTS: 807 patients were previously diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis. This diagnosis was rejected in 118 patients: 52 had another pathology altogether, the remaining 66 patients formed the study population. 38 patients with 'normal' imaging were reclassified as chronic abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS), and 28 patients had minimal change features of CP on EUS (MCEUS) but never progressed. Strict application of the Japanese diagnostic criteria would diagnose only two patients with early CP and eleven as possible CP. Patients were more likely to have MCEUS if the EUS was performed within 12 months of an attack of acute pancreatitis. 40 patients with MCEUS were identified, including an additional 12 who progressed to definite CP after a median of 30 (18.75-36.5) months. Those continuing to consume excess alcohol and/or continued smoking were significantly more likely to progress. Those who progressed were more likely to develop pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, require pancreatic surgery and had higher mortality. CONCLUSION: There needs to be more stringent application of the systems used for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis with revision of the current terminology 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible', and 'early' chronic pancreatitis. All patients with MCEUS features of CP require ongoing clinical follow up of at least 30 months and all patients with these features should be strongly counselled regarding smoking cessation and abstinence from alcohol.

Partial pancreatoduodenectomy versus duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection in chronic pancreatitis: the multicentre, randomised, controlled, double-blind ChroPac trial.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial uncertainty regarding the optimal surgical treatment for chronic pancreatitis. Short-term outcomes have been found to be better after duodenum-preserving pancreatic head resection (DPPHR) than after partial pancreatoduodenectomy. Therefore, we designed the multicentre ChroPac trial to investigate the long-term outcomes of patients with chronic pancreatitis within 24 months after surgery. METHODS: This randomised, controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, superiority trial was done in 18 hospitals across Europe. Patients with chronic pancreatitis who were planned for elective surgical treatment were randomly assigned to DPPHR or partial pancreatoduodenectomy with a central web-based randomisation tool. The primary endpoint was mean quality of life within 24 months after surgery, measured with the physical functioning scale of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30 questionnaire. Primary analysis included all patients who underwent one of the assigned procedures; safety analysis included all patients who underwent surgical intervention (categorised into groups as treated). Patients and outcome assessors were masked to group assignment. The trial was registered, ISRCTN38973832. Recruitment was completed on Sept 3, 2013. FINDINGS: Between Sept 10, 2009, and Sept 3, 2013, 250 patients were randomly assigned to DPPHR (n=125) or partial pancreatoduodenectomy (n=125), of whom 226 patients (115 in the DPPHR group and 111 in the partial pancreatoduodenectomy group) were analysed. No difference in quality of life was seen between the groups within 24 months after surgery (75·3 [SD 16·4] for partial pancreatoduodenectomy vs 73·0 [16·4] for DPPHR; mean difference -2·3, 95% CI -6·6 to 2·0; p=0·284). The incidence and severity of serious adverse events did not differ between the groups. 70 (64%) of 109 patients in the DPPHR group and 61 (52%) of 117 patients in the partial pancreatoduodenectomy group had at least one serious adverse event, with the most common being reoperations (for reasons other than chronic pancreatitis), gastrointestinal problems, and other surgical morbidity. INTERPRETATION: No differences in quality of life after surgery for chronic pancreatitis were seen between the interventions. Results from single-centre trials showing superiority for DPPHR were not confirmed in the multicentre setting. FUNDING: German Research Foundation (DFG).

Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.