A multicenter retrospective observational NAPOLEON2 study of nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan with fluorouracil and folinic acid (NFF) is a standard regimen after gemcitabine-based therapy for patients with unresectable or recurrent pancreatic cancer. However, there are limited clinical data on its efficacy and safety in the real-world. We therefore initiated a retrospective and prospective observational study (NAPOLEON-2). The results of the retrospective part were reported herein. In this retrospective study, we evaluated 161 consecutive patients who received NFF as second-or-later-line regimen. The main endpoint was overall survival (OS), and the other endpoints were response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS), dose intensity, and adverse events (AEs). The median age was 67 years (range, 38-85 years). The median OS and PFS were 8.1 and 3.4 months, respectively. The objective response and disease control rates were 5% and 52%, respectively. The median relative dose intensity was 81.6% for nanoliposomal irinotecan and 82.9% for fluorouracil. Grade 3 or 4 hematological and nonhematological AEs occurred in 47 and 42 patients, respectively. Common grade 3 or 4 AEs included neutropenia (24%), anorexia (12%), and leukocytopenia (12%). Subanalysis of patients treated with second-line and third-or-later-line demonstrated no statistical significant difference in OS (7.6 months vs. 9.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.64-1.35; p = 0.68). In conclusion, NFF has acceptable efficacy and safety profile even in real-world clinical settings. The prospective study is in progress to validate these findings.

Clinical and Diagnostic Utility of Genomic Profiling for Digestive Cancers: Real-World Evidence from Japan.

The usefulness of comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in the Japanese healthcare insurance system remains underexplored. Therefore, this large-scale study aimed to determine the usefulness of CGP in diagnosing digestive cancers. Patients with various cancer types recruited between March 2020 and October 2022 underwent the FoundationOne® CDx assay at the Keio PleSSision Group (19 hospitals in Japan). A scoring system was developed to identify potentially actionable genomic alterations of biological significance and actionable genomic alterations. The detection rates for potentially actionable genomic alterations, actionable genomic alterations, and alterations equivalent to companion diagnosis (CDx), as well as the signaling pathways associated with these alterations in each digestive cancer, were analyzed. Among the 1587 patients, 547 had digestive cancer. The detection rates of potentially actionable genomic alterations, actionable genomic alterations, and alterations equivalent to CDx were 99.5%, 62.5%, and 11.5%, respectively. APC, KRAS, and CDKN2A alterations were frequently observed in colorectal, pancreatic, and biliary cancers, respectively. Most digestive cancers, except esophageal cancer, were adenocarcinomas. Thus, the classification flowchart for digestive adenocarcinomas proposed in this study may facilitate precise diagnosis. CGP has clinical and diagnostic utility in digestive cancers.

Efficacy of second-line chemotherapy after treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

First-line chemotherapy for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC) includes gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) and FOLFIRINOX (FFX). However, the efficacy of second-line chemotherapy and the role of combination chemotherapy in clinical practice is still unknown. Data was gathered from 14 hospitals in the Kyushu area of Japan from December 2013 to March 2017. The median overall survival (mOS) from second-line treatment was contrasted between patients who received second-line chemotherapy (CT group) and those who received the best supportive care (BSC group). Furthermore, the mOS of combination chemotherapy was compared to mono chemotherapy in the CT group. To control possible bias in the selection of treatment, we performed a propensity score-adjusted analysis. A total of 255 patients received GnP or FFX as first-line chemotherapy. There were 156 in the CT group and 77 in the BSC group of these. The CT group had a significantly longer mOS than the BSC group (5.2 vs. 2.6 months; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.38; 95% CI 0.27-0.54). In the CT group, 89 patients received combination chemotherapy while 67 received mono chemotherapy. The mOS did not differ significantly between the combination and mono chemotherapy groups (5.5 vs. 4.8 months; adjusted HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.58-1.33). Among patients with MPC receiving second-line treatment, the CT group had a significantly longer mOS than the BSC group, but combination chemotherapy conferred no improvement in survival compared to mono chemotherapy.

C-reactive protein/albumin ratio is the most significant inflammatory marker in unresectable pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel.

There are limited absolute biomarkers for determining the prognosis before first- and second-line palliative chemotherapy in unresectable pancreatic cancer (urPC) patients. To find the best prognostic inflammatory marker, we investigated relationships between overall survival (OS) and six inflammatory markers; C-reactive protein/albumin ratio (CAR), neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), prognostic nutrition index (PNI), platelet-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), Glasgow prognostic score (GPS), and prognostic index (PI). We examined 255 patients who received gemcitabine + nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy and 159 patients who subsequently underwent second-line chemotherapy. First-line patients with lower CAR had better OS compared to those with a higher CAR (hazard ratio 0.57; 95% confidential index 0.42-77; P < 0.01). Similarly, lower NLR (P = 0.01), higher PNI (P = 0.04), lower PLR (P = 0.03), GPS score of 0 (P < 0.01) and PI score of 0 (P < 0.01) were all associated with better OS. CAR demonstrated the best superiority for determining survival prognosis through the use of area under the curve of time-dependent receiver-operating characteristic curves. Furthermore, a lower CAR before second-line therapy exhibited better OS versus higher CAR (P < 0.01). Therefore, CAR might be a useful biomarker for predicting urPC patient prognosis in both first- and second-line chemotherapy.

Scoring model with serum albumin and CA19-9 for metastatic pancreatic cancer in second-line treatment: results from the NAPOLEON study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer refractory to first-line chemotherapy (CTx) have few treatment options. It is unclear what kind of patients could be brought about survival benefit by 2nd-line CTx after refractory to gemcitabine + nab-PTX (GnP) or FOLFIRINOX. METHODS: This analysis was conducted as part of a multicenter retrospective study of GnP or FOLFIRINOX in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Excluding censored cases, 156 and 77 patients, respectively, received second-line chemotherapy (CTx) and best supportive care (BSC). Using prognostic factors for post-discontinuation survivals (PDSs) at the first-line determination in multivariate analysis, we developed a scoring system to demonstrate the benefit of second-line CTx. RESULTS: The second-line CTx group had a median PDS of 5.2 months, whereas the BSC group had a median PDS of 2.7 months (hazard ratio 0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.31-0.57; p < 0.01). According to the Cox regression model, serum albumin levels below 3.5 g/dL, and CA19-9 levels above 1000 U/mL were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.01). Serum albumin (≥ and < 3.5 g/dL allotted to scores 0 and 1) and CA19-9 (< and ≥ 1000 U/mL allotted to scores 0 and 1) at first-line determination were used to develop the scoring system. The PDSs of patients with scores of 0 and 1 were significantly better than those of the BSC group; however, there was no significant difference between the PDSs of patients with score 2 and the BSC group. CONCLUSION: The survival advantage of second-line CTx, was observed in patients with scores of 0 and 1 but not in those with score 2.

Conversion Surgery for Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer Treated With FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine Plus Nab-paclitaxel.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Recent advances in chemotherapy have made significant progress in conversion surgery (CS) for unresectable pancreatic cancer (uPC). However, the success rate and efficacy of CS have not been fully demonstrated in patients with uPC treated with FOLFIRINOX (FFX) or gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 318 patients with uPC who received FFX or GnP as first-line chemotherapy. The efficacy in the CS group, defined as undergoing complete resection after chemotherapy, was analyzed, and compared with the non-CS group; then, contributing factors to achieving CS were extracted. We also analyzed differences in the efficacy of CS between locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) and metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). RESULTS: Overall, CS was achieved in 4.3% of cases, eight patients (13.3%) with LAPC and five (2.1%) with MPC. Contributing factors to CS were LAPC, no liver metastasis, CA19-9 ≤37, and chemotherapy response. After adjusting for these, overall survival was significantly better in the CS group than in the non-CS group [median of 32.9 vs. 11.3 months; adjusted hazard ratio (HR)=0.32; 95% confidence interval (CI)=0.14-0.70; p<0.01]. Median relapse-free survival duration after CS was 19.1 and 18.1 months in the LAPC-CS and MPC-CS group, respectively (p=0.84). The median post-conversion survival was 27.6 months in the entire CS group, 43.8 months in the LAPC-CS group and 21.3 months in the MPC-CS group. CONCLUSION: CS was achieved in 13.3% of LAPC and 2.1% of MPC cases. If possible, CS can markedly improve prognosis, even in MPC.

[MSI-high ascending colon cancer treated with second-line ipilimumab plus nivolumab for conversion surgery:a case report].

A 68-year-old woman with ascending colon cancer was the patient (cT4bN2M1a [LYM] cStage IVA, BRAF V600E mutation-positive, and MSI-high). She was given modified FOLFOXIRI as first-line therapy but did not respond. The infiltration of the primary lesion in the abdominal wall was alleviated, allowing conversion surgery to be performed.

The Prognostic Utility of a Geriatric Assessment for Patients with Pancreatic Cancer Receiving Gemcitabine-based Chemotherapy: A Prospective Observational Study.

Objective To evaluate the effect of a pretreatment geriatric assessment on the clinical outcomes in older patients with unresectable or recurrent pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) scheduled to receive gemcitabine (GEM)/GEM+nab-paclitaxel (GnP). Patients Older patients with unresectable PDAC scheduled to receive GEM/GnP who visited Kyorin University Hospital and cooperating institutions were enrolled and followed from April 2015 to March 2020. The maximum observation period was two years. All patients underwent a cancer-specific geriatric assessment (CSGA) and optional geriatric assessment (GA) before treatment initiation and two months after the start of treatment. The patients' background characteristics, tumor progression, tumor site, and regimen (GEM/GnP) were examined in a Cox proportional hazards model. The relationship between the overall survival (OS) and GA score was also determined. Eligible patients (age ≥70 years old with histopathologically confirmed unresectable or recurrent PDAC) were scheduled to receive first-line chemotherapy. Results The performance status (PS) and activities of daily living (ADL)/instrumental ADL (IADL) scores at baseline correlated with the OS. Furthermore, even in cases with normal baseline values, lower Frontal Assessment Battery scores and higher Geriatric Depression Scale-Short Form scores after treatment initiation were significantly correlated with OS. Conclusion The baseline PS, ADL, and IADL may be prognostic factors in older PDAC patients. In addition, a normal frontal lobe function and depression scores prior to treatment initiation that rapidly worsened during treatment were independently associated with a reduced OS. Selecting appropriate interventions and improving the therapeutic environment may prolong the OS in such patients.

Multicenter Retrospective Analysis of Original versus Modified FOLFIRINOX in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer: Results of the NAPOLEON Study.

INTRODUCTION: Original FOLFIRINOX (oFFX) is more toxic than other regimens for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC); therefore, a modified FFX (mFFX) regimen with a reduced dosage has been used in Japanese clinical practice. However, very few studies have compared these two regimens. METHODS: This study was conducted as part of a multicenter retrospective study of 318 patients with mPC across 14 centers in Japan (NAPOLEON study). To control for potential bias and confounders, we conducted a propensity score-adjusted analysis of patient characteristics and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: oFFX and mFFX were administered to 48 and 54 patients. More patients with younger age and poorer performance status were included in the oFFX group. The overall survival (OS; median, 11.6 vs. 11.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.60-1.40; p = 0.67), progression-free survival (PFS) (median, 6.3 vs. 5.7 months; HR, 0.85; 95% CI, 0.56-1.28; p = 0.44), and overall response rate (29 vs. 26%, p = 0.71) were not significantly different for the oFFX and mFFX groups. Thrombopenia and liver dysfunction were significantly more frequent with oFFX than with mFFX. The median received dose intensity of CPT-11 was higher with oFFX than with mFFX (299 vs. 270 mg/m2/week, p < 0.01). The propensity score-adjusted analysis revealed no statistically significant differences in OS and PFS between the two groups. CONCLUSION: In our data, there was no significant difference in efficacy between mFFX and oFFX, and mFFX has fewer adverse events.

Prognostic nomogram for patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer treated with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel or FOLFIRINOX: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter retrospective study in Japan (NAPOLEON study).

BACKGROUND: No reliable nomogram has been developed until date for predicting the survival in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer undergoing treatment with gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) or FOLFIRINOX. METHODS: This analysis was conducted using clinical data of Japanese patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer undergoing GnP or FOLFIRINOX treatment obtained from a multicenter study (NAPOLEON study). A Cox proportional hazards model was used to identify the independent prognostic factors. A nomogram to predict 6-, 12-, and 18-month survival probabilities was generated, validated by using the concordance index (C-index), and calibrated by the bootstrapping method. And then, we attempted risk stratification for survival by classifying the patients according to the sum of the scores on the nomogram (total nomogram points). RESULTS: A total of 318 patients were enrolled. A prognostic nomogram was generated using data on the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, liver metastasis, serum LDH, serum CRP, and serum CA19-9. The C-indexes of the nomogram were 0.77, 0.72 and 0.70 for 6-, 12-, and 18-month survival, respectively. The calibration plot showed optimal agreement at all points. Risk stratification based on tertiles of the total nomogram points yielded clear separations of the survival curves. The median survival times in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups were 15.8, 12.8 and 7.8 months (P<0.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Our nomogram might be a convenient and inexpensive tool to accurately predict survival in Japanese patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer undergoing treatment with GnP or FOLFIRINOX, and will help clinicians in selecting appropriate therapeutic strategies for individualized management.

Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel in older patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: A post-hoc analysis of the real-world data of a multicenter study (the NAPOLEON study).

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) in older patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC), especially those ≥75 years old. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study retrospectively enrolled 153 patients with MPC who received GnP as first-line chemotherapy. Patients ≥75 years old were allocated to the older group, and those <75 years old were assigned to the non-older group. We compared safety, antitumor efficacy, and survival between the two groups. In the older group, prognostic indicators of survival were also assessed. RESULTS: The pretreatment characteristics of the two groups were not significantly different excluding age, history of malignancy, and C-reactive protein levels. The initial dose and relative dose intensities of GnP were significantly lower in the older group. There were no significant differences in the adverse event and antitumor response rates between the two groups. Median progression-free survival and overall survival were 5.5 and 12.0 months, respectively, in the older group, versus 6.0 and 11.1 months, respectively, in the non-older group. In the older group, a Geriatric Nutrition Risk Index (GNRI) of less than 86 was associated with poor prognosis. CONCLUSION: GnP exhibited acceptable efficacy and safety in patients ≥75 years old with MPC. GNRI might be helpful for identifying older individuals at higher risk of unfavorable outcomes.

Gemcitabine Plus Nab-Paclitaxel Versus FOLFIRINOX in Locally Advanced, Unresectable Pancreatic Cancer: A Multicenter Observational Study (NAPOLEON Study).

OBJECTIVES: FOLFIRINOX (FFX, a combination of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) have been used as standard, first-line treatments for advanced pancreatic cancer. However, no study has compared the efficacy of the 2 regimens. This study retrospectively compared the efficacy and safety of the 2 regimens in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We reviewed the records of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer who started FFX or GnP as first-line chemotherapy as part of a multicenter retrospective study in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer treated with FFX or GnP (NAPOLEON study). RESULTS: Sixteen of the 63 patients were treated with FFX, and the other 47 patients were treated with GnP between December 2013 and March 2017. There were no significant differences in median overall survival rate between the GnP (15.5 months) and FFX (14.3 months, P = 0.60) groups or median progression-free survival rate between the GnP (8.8 months) and FFX (8.1 months, P = 0.51) groups. Both treatments were generally well tolerated, although anorexia was more severe in the FFX group than in the GnP group. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of FFX and GnP were similar but resulted in different toxicities, which could guide agent choice.

Gemcitabine Plus Nanoparticle Albumin-bound Paclitaxel Versus FOLFIRINOX for Recurrent Pancreatic Cancer After Resection.

BACKGROUND/AIM: The aim of the study was to evaluate gemcitabine plus nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel (GnP) and FOLFIRINOX for recurrent pancreatic cancer (rPC) after resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Forty-four patients with rPC and 211 with de novo metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) who received GnP or FOLFIRINOX as first-line chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed. RESULTS: On crude analysis, the median overall survival (OS) was significantly longer in the rPC group than in the mPC group (14.0 vs. 10.6 months, respectively; p=0.02). However, the difference was not significant on adjusted analysis using the Cox proportional hazards model (adjusted p=0.90). Patients receiving FOLFIRINOX (n=10) and GnP (n=34) in the rPC group had comparable OS (medians, 12.2 vs. 14.4 months, respectively; p=0.82) even after adjusting for covariates using the Cox model (adjusted p=0.18). CONCLUSION: The outcomes of patients in the rPC and mPC groups were comparable following chemotherapy. Both FOLFIRINOX and GnP may be reasonable options for treating rPC.

Analysis of factors affecting progression-free survival of first-line chemotherapy in older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies have investigated factors influencing the efficacy of chemotherapy in older patients with cancer. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of G8, geriatric assessment (GA), and factors measured in general clinical practice for evaluating progression-free survival (PFS) of first-line palliative chemotherapy in older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational study of older patients (age ≥70 years) with advanced gastrointestinal cancer. The modified cut-off value of G8 was determined by referring to two or more abnormal GA conditions. The usefulness of baseline GA and G8 (conventional and modified cut-off value) was assessed according to the efficacy (PFS and disease control rate) of the administered first-line palliative chemotherapy. RESULTS: Overall, 93 patients were evaluated between March 2017 and February 2019. A modified G8 cut-off value of ≤12 had a sensitivity and specificity of 68.9% and 46.9%, respectively. PFS was significantly prolonged in the patients with G8 > 12, serum albumin ≥3.5 g/dl, and in whom grade ≥3 adverse events occurred. There was no significant difference in the PFS between monotherapy and combination therapy. GA was not useful for predicting PFS prolongation or the occurrence of serious adverse events in first-line treatment. CONCLUSION: Among older patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancer who receive first-line chemotherapy, a modified G8 cut-off value of 12 points, occurrence of grade 3 or higher adverse events, albumin levels, rather than age or performance status were predictors of PFS prolongation.

[Pulse steroid therapy to treat liver injury with risk of liver failure due to immune-related adverse events:a case report].

A 75-year-old woman was diagnosed with clinical stage III lung cancer. The patient was treated with chemoradiotherapy and subsequent durvalumab, an anti-PD-L1 antibody immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI). Liver dysfunction was observed 14 days after the start of durvalumab therapy (aspartate transaminase, 218U/l;alanine aminotransferase, 169U/l). This corresponded to a grade 3 adverse event according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. The second course of durvalumab was withheld. The patient was hospitalized 31 days after durvalumab therapy because of worsening liver dysfunction. Laboratory findings and imaging examinations suggested liver injury due to an immune-related adverse event (irAE). Liver biopsy performed 38 days after durvalumab therapy showed severe lymphocyte and plasma cell infiltration into the portal tract, focal necrosis in the hepatic lobules, and necrotic changes around the hepatic lobules. These findings were similar to those of autoimmune hepatitis (AIH). Immunohistochemical results revealed infiltration of CD3- and CD8-positive lymphocytes and mild infiltration of CD4-positive lymphocytes. Pathological findings in the liver tissue were consistent with an irAE. Jaundice worsened and the prothrombin time was prolonged, leading to a risk of progression to liver failure. Thus, pulse steroid therapy was performed with methylprednisolone (mPSL) starting at 0.8mg/kg. Liver dysfunction lessened and the mPSL dose was gradually reduced. Moreover, ICIs exert antitumor effects by inhibiting the immune checkpoint system but can cause irAEs in various organs. Liver injury is also relatively common. Liver tissue findings are similar to those in AIH, but immunostaining reveals the presence of numerous CD8-positive lymphocytes. Fewer CD4-positive lymphocytes exist in irAE-associated liver injury than in AIH. Medical departments must cooperate and effectively manage irAEs because ICIs are increasingly being used and can occur in organs throughout the body. In principle, irAEs are treated with steroids. Thus, high-dose steroids diminishing the therapeutic effect of ICIs is a concern, and it is important to control irAEs with low-dose steroids that are started earlier.

A multicenter propensity score analysis of FOLFIRINOX vs gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel administered to patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer: results from the NAPOLEON study.

PURPOSE: Fluorouracil, leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX, FFX) and gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel (GnP) are considered standard treatments for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Direct comparisons are not available that establish which is optimal. METHODS: We conducted a propensity score-adjusted analysis of patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer to identify the therapeutic advantages of these standard therapies. We used clinical data as part of a multicenter retrospective study of patients with unresectable or recurrent pancreatic cancer treated with FFX or GnP (NAPOLEON study). RESULTS: FFX and GnP were initially administered to 102 and 153 patients, respectively. The GnP group comprised more patients of advanced age, worse performance status, lower body mass index, recurrence, and lower albumin concentrations. Median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were 11.5 months and 5.8 months in the FFX group and 11.1 months and 5.9 months in the GnP group, respectively. Propensity score-adjusted analysis indicated that the administration of FFX or GnP was not independently associated with OS (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.06; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.76-1.47; P = 0.73). Similarly, the difference in PFS was not significant between groups (adjusted HR 0.93; 95% CI 0.68-1.26; P = 0.62). Gastrointestinal disorders were more common in the FFX group, whereas the frequencies of hematological, nervous system, and skin disorders were higher in the GnP group. CONCLUSION: The efficacies of FFX and GnP were comparable, although safety profiles differed and should be considered in selecting treatment.

Two cases of liver cirrhosis with hyperammonemic encephalopathy caused by urease-producing bacteria in the urinary tract.

Hyperammonemia is often experienced as a complication of liver cirrhosis, but it is not well known that hyperammonemic encephalopathy is induced by urease-splitting bacteria in the urinary tract. We report two cases of hyperammonemia in two women in their 80s with liver cirrhosis. Both cases were treated as hepatic encephalopathy with usual treatment, but there was no improvement. Urinalysis showed marked alkalinuria and urine culture showed urease-splitting bacteria, which were thought to be related to the pathology. After drainage of urine and administration of antimicrobials, the blood ammonia level decreased and the urine pH level normalized. The mechanism of this is that ammonia is produced by the degradation of urinary urea by urease-producing bacteria in the bladder, and in the presence of dysuria, it is absorbed into the blood circulation from the bladder venous plexus, leading to hyperammonemia.Urine findings should be confirmed when a patient with liver disease develops hyperammonemia or is unresponsive to conventional hepatic encephalopathy treatment.

Diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based cytology for solid pancreatic lesion samples obtained with endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: Propensity score-matched analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is a paucity of data on the diagnostic efficacy of liquid-based cytology (LBC) for pancreatic samples obtained by endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (EUS-FNA). Using propensity score matching, we retrospectively analyzed the additional diagnostic value of LBC compared to a conventional Papanicolaou smear (CPS) for samples of solid pancreatic lesions obtained by EUS-FNA. METHODS: This cohort study included 126 matched patients who underwent initial EUS-FNA for solid pancreatic lesions between January 2009 and August 2014. CPS was used for cytology of EUS-FNA samples obtained until May 2012 (63 patients). Subsequently, LBC was used for cytological analysis (63 patients). Diagnostic yields of CPS and LBC for malignancy were compared. Risk factors for cytological misdiagnosis with LBC were investigated. RESULTS: Overall rate of malignancy was 86% after matching. LBC had higher diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy than CPS (96.6% vs 84.0%, P = 0.03; and 96.8% vs 87.3%, P = 0.05). LBC was significantly more sensitive for diagnosing pancreatic head lesions (96.4% vs 78.1%, P = 0.04). The sensitivity for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with LBC was higher (98.1% vs 83.0%, P = 0.009). Multivariate analysis revealed that malignant tumors other than PDAC (P = 0.004) and lesion size ≤20 mm (P = 0.046) were risk factors for LBC misdiagnosis in all participants. CONCLUSIONS: For solid pancreatic lesions, LBC of EUS-FNA samples contributes to the diagnosis of malignancy. Malignant tumors other than PDAC and small tumors are difficult to diagnose using EUS-FNA and LBC.