Extrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Genomic Variables Associated With Anatomic Location and Outcome.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to define genomic differences between perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (PCA) and distal cholangiocarcinoma (DCA) and identify genomic determinants of survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Consecutive patients with ECA with tissue for targeted next-generation sequencing were analyzed, stratified by anatomic site (PCA/DCA), disease extent, and treatment. Associations between genomic alterations, clinicopathologic features, and outcomes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression to compare survival. RESULTS: In total, 224 patients diagnosed between 2004 and 2022 (n = 127 PCA; n = 97 DCA) met inclusion criteria. The median survival was 29 months (43 after resection and 17 from diagnosis for unresectable disease). Compared with PCA, DCA was enriched in TP53alt (alterations; 69% v 33%; Q < 0.01), epigenetic pathway alterations (45% v 29%; Q = 0.041), and had more total altered pathways (median 3 v 2; Q < 0.01). KRASalt frequency was similar between PCA (36%) and DCA (37%); however, DCA was enriched in KRAS G12D (19% v 9%; P = .002). No other clinicopathologic or genomic variables distinguished subtypes. In resected patients, no genomic alterations were associated with outcome. However, in unresectable patients, CDKN2Aalt (hazard ratio [HR], 2.59 [1.48 to 4.52]) and APCalt (HR, 5.11 [1.96 to 13.3]) were associated with reduced survival. For the entire cohort, irresectability (HR, 3.13 [2.25 to 4.36]), CDKN2Aalt (HR, 1.80 [1.80 to 2.68]), and APCalt (HR, 2.00 [1.04 to 3.87]) were associated with poor survival. CONCLUSION: CDKN2Aalt and APCalt were associated with poor survival in ECA, primarily in advanced disease. As PCA and DCA were genetically similar, coanalysis of PCA and DCA in future genomic studies is reasonable.

Clinicogenomic predictors of outcomes in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma treated with immunotherapy.

INTRODUCTION: Immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combinations extend overall survival (OS) while anti-PD-1/L1 monotherapy is non-inferior to sorafenib in treatment-naïve, patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Clinicogenomic features are posited to influence patient outcomes. METHODS: The primary objective of this retrospective study was to define the clinical, pathologic, and genomic factors associated with outcomes to ICI therapy in patients with HCC. Patients with histologically confirmed advanced HCC treated with ICI at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2012 to 2022 were included. Association between clinical, pathological, and genomic characteristics were assessed with univariable and multivariable Cox regression model for progression-free survival (PFS) and OS. RESULTS: Two-hundred and forty-two patients were treated with ICI-based therapy. Patients were predominantly male (82%) with virally mediated HCC (53%) and Child Pugh A score (70%). Median follow-up was 28 months (0.5-78.4). Median PFS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line and ≥ 3rd line was 4.9 (range: 2.9-6.2), 3.1 (2.3-4.0), and 2.5 (2.1-4.0) months, respectively. Median OS for those treated in 1st line, 2nd line, and ≥ 3rd line was 16 (11-22), 7.5 (6.4-11), and 6.4 (4.6-26) months, respectively. Poor liver function and performance status associated with worse PFS and OS, while viral hepatitis C was associated with favorable outcome. Genetic alterations were not associated with outcomes. CONCLUSION: Clinicopathologic factors were the major determinates of outcomes for patients with advanced HCC treated with ICI. Molecular profiling did not aid in stratification of ICI outcomes. Future studies should explore alternative biomarkers such as the level of immune activation or the pretreatment composition of the immune tumor microenvironment.

Safety of Selective Operative Drainage After Pancreatic Resection: A Retrospective Analysis of 2,607 Patients.

OBJECTIVE: To assess whether selective omission of operative drains after pancreaticoduodenectomy (PD) and distal pancreatectomy (DP) is associated with adverse perioperative outcomes. BACKGROUND: The routine use of operative drains after pancreatectomy is widely practiced; however, prospective randomized clinical trials and retrospective analyses have shown mixed results. METHODS: Patients who underwent PD or DP between November 2009 and May 2021 were reviewed and stratified by operative drain placement. Patient demographics, morbidity, the need for additional procedures, and mortality were compared between patients who did or did not develop a clinically relevant post-operative pancreatic fistula (CR-POPF). RESULTS: In total, 1,855 PD and 752 DP cases were analyzed. Among PD patients with a CR-POPF (N=259, 14%), 160 (62%) had an operative drain placed, of whom 141 (88%) required at least 1 additional procedure. Within this subgroup, grade ≥ 4 complications (7.5% vs. 11.1%, P=0.37), 90-day mortality (3.8% vs. 6.1%, P=0.54), length of stay (LOS) (median 12 vs. 13 d, P=0.19) and readmission rates (63.1% vs. 54.6%, P=0.19) were similar between drained and non-drained patients. Of note, drained PD patients without a CR-POPF had a longer hospital stay (8 vs. 7 d, respectively, P=0.004) and more thromboembolic events (2.4% vs. 1.1%, respectively, P=0.04) Among DP patients with a CR-POPF (n=129), 44 had an operative drain, with 37 (84%) requiring an additional procedure. Within this subgroup, grade ≥ 4 complications (4.6% vs. 5.9%, P>0.95), 90-day mortality (0%), LOS (median 7 d for both, P=0.88) and readmission rates (72.7% vs. 80%, P=0.38) were similar in drained and non-drained patients. CONCLUSION: This study confirms that selective omission of operative drains does not compromise perioperative outcomes, as initially reported in our prospective randomized trial.

A Novel Approach to Quantify Heterogeneity of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: the Hidden-Genome Classifier.

PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (IHC) are heterogeneous tumors. The hidden-genome classifier, a supervised machine learning-based algorithm, was used to quantify tumor heterogeneity and improve classification. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A retrospective review of 1370 patients with IHC, extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (EHC), gallbladder cancer (GBC), hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), or biphenotypic tumors was conducted. A hidden-genome model classified 527 IHCs based on genetic similarity to EHC/GBC or HCC. Genetic, histologic, and clinical data were correlated. RESULTS: 410 IHC (78%) had >50% genetic homology with EHC/GBC; 122 (23%) had >90% homology ("biliary-class"), characterized by alterations of KRAS, SMAD4, and CDKN2A loss. 117 IHC (22%) had >50% genetic homology with HCC; 30 (5.7%) had >90% homology ("HCC-class"), characterized by TERT alterations. Patients with biliary- vs. non-biliary-class IHC had median overall survival (OS) of 1 year (95% CI: 0.77, 1.5) vs. 1.8 years (95% CI: 1.6, 2.0) for unresectable disease and 2.4 years (95% CI: 2.1, NR) vs. 5.1 years (95% CI: 4.8, 6.9) for resectable disease. Large-duct-IHC (n=28) was more common in the biliary-class (n=27); HCC-class was comprised mostly of small-duct-IHC (64%, p=0.02). The hidden-genomic classifier predicted OS independent of FGFR2 and IDH1 alterations. By contrast, the histology subtype did not predict OS. CONCLUSIONS: IHC genetics form a spectrum with worse OS for tumors genetically aligned with EHC/GBC. The classifier proved superior to histologic subtypes for predicting OS independent of FGFR2 and IDH1 alterations. These results may explain the differential treatment responses seen in IHC and may direct therapy by help stratifing patients in future clinical trials.

Disease-free survival after pancreatectomy for pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: a 17-year single-center experience of 223 patients.

BACKGROUND: Metastasis or recurrence of pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (pNETs) after pancreatectomy presents an important source of post-surgical morbidity. Accordingly we aim to define disease-free survival (DFS) in this population. METHODS: Patients who underwent pancreatectomy for pNETs between Jan 2005 and Jan 2022, were included. Clinicopathologic and survival data were collected and the primary endpoint was DFS. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards regression modelling were performed. RESULTS: Of the 223 patients, 144 (65%) distal/subtotal/partial pancreatectomies, 71 (32%) pancreaticoduodectomies, 6 (3%) total pancreatectomies, and 2 (1%) enucleations were performed. Forty-five (20%) patients had disease recurrence or metastasis after index pancreatectomy during the 17 years of the study. Non-functional pNETs (n=162, 73%) were more common than hormonally functional sub-types. The 2-year and 5-year DFS were 82% and 76%, respectively. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated node positivity, size ≥4cm, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, Ki-67 ≥20% and non-functional pNETs to be significantly associated with lowered DFS (p<0.05). Univariate Cox analysis identified the following predictors to be significantly associated with poorer DFS: larger tumour size (HR: 1.16 [95% CI: 1.04-1.28]), Ki-67 index ≥20% (HR: 4.93 [95% CI: 2.00-11.44]), perineural invasion (HR: 3.23 [95% CI: 1.40-7.89]), open surgery (HR: 3.34 [95% CI: 1.03-1.33]), node-positive disease (HR: 5.27 [95% CI: 2.28-13.26]) and increased BMI (HR: 1.10 [95% CI: 1.03-1.17]) (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: One in every five resected patients developed recurrence or metastasis after pancreatectomy. Prognostic predictors of DFS in pNETs could help optimize treatment and enhance follow-up protocols to improve quality and reduce morbidity.

Advancing minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary surgery: ensuring safety with implementation.

BACKGROUND: Although minimally invasive hepato-pancreato-biliary (MIS HPB) surgery can be performed with good outcomes, there are currently no standardized requirements for centers or surgeons who wish to implement MIS HPB surgery. The aim of this study was to create a consensus statement regarding safe dissemination and implementation of MIS HPB surgical programs. METHODS: Sixteen key questions regarding safety in MIS HPB surgery were generated after a focused literature search and iterative review by three field experts. Participants for the working group were then selected using sequential purposive sampling and snowball techniques. Review of the 16 questions took place over a single 2-h meeting. The senior author facilitated the session, and a modified nominal group technique was used. RESULTS: Twenty three surgeons were in attendance. All participants agreed or strongly agreed that formal guidelines should exist for both institutions and individual surgeons interested in implementing MIS HPB surgery and that routine monitoring and reporting of institutional and surgeon technical outcomes should be performed. Regarding volume cutoffs, most participants (91%) agreed or strongly agreed that a minimum annual institutional volume cutoff for complex MIS HPB surgery, such as major hepatectomy or pancreaticoduodenectomy, should exist. A smaller proportion (74%) agreed or strongly agreed that a minimum annual surgeon volume requirement should exist. The majority of participants agreed or strongly agreed that surgeons were responsible for defining (100%) and enforcing (78%) guidelines to ensure the overall safety of MIS HPB programs. Finally, formal MIS HPB training, minimum case volume requirements, institutional support and infrastructure, and mandatory collection of outcomes data were all recognized as important aspects of safe implementation of MIS HPB surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Safe implementation of MIS HPB surgery requires a thoughtful process that incorporates structured training, sufficient volume and expertise, a proper institutional ecosystem, and monitoring of outcomes.

Salvage Ablative Radiotherapy for Isolated Local Recurrence of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma following Definitive Surgery.

Introduction: The rate of isolated locoregional recurrence after surgery for pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) approaches 25%. Ablative radiation therapy (A-RT) has improved outcomes for locally advanced disease in the primary setting. We sought to evaluate the outcomes of salvage A-RT for isolated locoregional recurrence and examine the relationship between subsequent patterns of failure, radiation dose, and treatment volume. Methods: We conducted a retrospective analysis of all consecutive participants who underwent A-RT for an isolated locoregional recurrence of PDAC after prior surgery at our institution between 2016 and 2021. Treatment consisted of ablative dose (BED10 98-100 Gy) to the gross disease with an additional prophylactic low dose (BED10 < 50 Gy), with the elective volume covering a 1.5 cm isotropic expansion around the gross disease and the circumference of the involved vessels. Local and locoregional failure (LF and LRF, respectively) estimated by the cumulative incidence function with competing risks, distant metastasis-free and overall survival (DMFS and OS, respectively) estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method, and toxicities scored by CTCAE v5.0 are reported. Location of recurrence was mapped to the dose region on the initial radiation plan. Results: Among 65 participants (of whom two had two A-RT courses), the median age was 67 (range 37-87) years, 36 (55%) were male, and 53 (82%) had undergone pancreaticoduodenectomy with a median disease-free interval to locoregional recurrence of 16 (range, 6-71) months. Twenty-seven participants (42%) received chemotherapy prior to A-RT. With a median follow-up of 35 months (95%CI, 26-56 months) from diagnosis of recurrence, 24-month OS and DMFS were 57% (95%CI, 46-72%) and 22% (95%CI, 14-37%), respectively, while 24-month cumulative incidence of in-field LF and total LRF were 28% (95%CI, 17-40%) and 36% (95%CI 24-48%), respectively. First failure after A-RT was distant in 35 patients (53.8%), locoregional in 12 patients (18.5%), and synchronous distant and locoregional in 10 patients (15.4%). Most locoregional failures occurred in elective low-dose volumes. Acute and chronic grade 3-4 toxicities were noted in 1 (1.5%) and 5 patients (7.5%), respectively. Conclusions: Salvage A-RT achieves favorable OS and local control outcomes in participants with an isolated locoregional recurrence of PDAC after surgical resection. Consideration should be given to extending high-dose fields to include adjacent segments of at-risk vessels beyond direct contact with the gross disease.

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

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

Morbidity and mortality in patients with stage IV pancreatic adenocarcinoma and acute cholangitis: Outcomes and risk prognostication.

BACKGROUND: Acute cholangitis (AC) is a common complication of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Herein, we evaluated outcomes after the first AC episode and predictors of mortality and AC recurrence in patients with stage IV PDAC. METHODS: We conducted a single-center, retrospective observational study using institutional databases. Clinical data and outcomes for patients with stage IV PDAC and at least one documented episode of AC, were assessed. Overall survival (OS) was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox regression model was employed to identify predictors of AC recurrence and mortality. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four patients with stage IV PDAC and AC identified between January 01, 2014 and October 31, 2020 were included. Median OS after first episode of AC was 4.1 months (95 % CI, 4.0-5.5), and 30-day, 6, and 12-month survival was 86.2 % (95 % CI, 80.3-92.5), 37 % (95 % CI, 29.3-46.6 %) and 18.9 % (95 % CI, 13.1-27.3 %), respectively. Primary tumor in pancreatic body/tail (HR 2.29, 95 % CI: 1.26 to 4.18, p = 0.011), concomitant metastases to liver and other sites (HR 1.96, 95 % CI: 1.16 to 3.31, p = 0.003) and grade 3 AC (HR 2.26, 95 % CI: 1.45 to 3.52, p < 0.001), predicted worse outcomes. Intensive care unit admission, sepsis, systemic therapy, treatment regimen, and time to intervention did not predict survival or risk of recurrence of AC. CONCLUSIONS: AC confers significant morbidity and mortality in advanced PDAC. Worse outcomes are associated with higher grade AC, primary tumor location in pancreatic body/tail, and metastases to liver and other sites.

Hemorrhage Sites and Mitigation Strategies After Pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Importance: Postpancreatectomy hemorrhage is an uncommon but highly morbid complication of pancreaticoduodenectomy. Clinical evidence often draws suspicion to the gastroduodenal artery stump, even without a clear source. Objective: To determine the frequency of gastroduodenal artery bleeding compared to other sites and the results of mitigation strategies. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study involved a retrospective analysis of data for consecutive patients who had pancreaticoduodenectomy from 2011 to 2021 at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSK) and Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (TJUH). Exposures: Demographic, perioperative, and disease-related variables. Main Outcomes and Measures: The incidence, location, treatment, and outcomes of primary (initial) and secondary (recurrent) hemorrhage requiring invasive intervention were analyzed. Imaging studies were re-reviewed by interventional radiologists to confirm sites. Results: Inclusion criteria were met by 3040 patients (n = 1761 MSK, n = 1279 TJUH). Patients from both institutions were similar in age (median [IQR] age at MSK, 67 [59-74] years, and at TJUH, 68 [60-75] years) and sex (at MSK, 814 female [46.5%] and 947 male [53.8%], and at TJUH, 623 [48.7%] and 623 male [51.3%]). Primary hemorrhage occurred in 90 patients (3.0%), of which the gastroduodenal artery was the source in 15 (16.7%), unidentified sites in 24 (26.7%), and non-gastroduodenal artery sites in 51 (56.7%). Secondary hemorrhage occurred in 23 patients; in 4 (17.4%), the gastroduodenal artery was the source. Of all hemorrhage events (n = 117), the gastroduodenal artery was the source in 19 (16.2%, 0.63% incidence in all pancreaticoduodenectomies). Gastroduodenal artery hemorrhage was more often associated with soft gland texture (14 [93.3%] vs 41 [62.1%]; P = .02) and later presentation (median [IQR], 21 [15-26] vs 10 days [5-18]; P = .002). Twenty-three patients underwent empirical gastroduodenal artery embolization or stent placement, 7 (30.4%) of whom subsequently experienced secondary hemorrhage. Twenty percent of all gastroduodenal artery embolizations/stents (8/40 patients), including 13% (3/13 patients) of empirical treatments, were associated with significant morbidity (7 hepatic infarction, 4 biliary stricture), with a 90-day mortality rate of 38.5% (n = 5) for patients with these complications vs 7.8% without (n = 6; P = .008). Ninety-day mortality was 12.2% (n = 11) for patients with hemorrhage (3 patients [20%] with primary gastroduodenal vs 8 [10.7%] for all others; P = .38) compared with 2% (n = 59) for patients without hemorrhage. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, postpancreatectomy hemorrhage was uncommon and the spectrum was broad, with the gastroduodenal artery responsible for a minority of bleeding events. Empirical gastroduodenal artery embolization/stent without obvious sequelae of recent hemorrhage was associated with significant morbidity and rebleeding and should not be routine practice. Successful treatment of postpancreatectomy hemorrhage requires careful assessment of all potential sources, even after gastroduodenal artery mitigation.

Critical updates in neuroendocrine tumors: Version 9 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system for all cancer sites, including gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (GEP-NETs), is meant to be dynamic, requiring periodic updates to optimize AJCC staging definitions. This entails the collaboration of experts charged with evaluating new evidence that supports changes to each staging system. GEP-NETs are the second most prevalent neoplasm of gastrointestinal origin after colorectal cancer. Since publication of the AJCC eighth edition, the World Health Organization has updated the classification and separates grade 3 GEP-NETs from poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma. In addition, because of major advancements in diagnostic and therapeutic technologies for GEP-NETs, AJCC version 9 advocates against the use of serum chromogranin A for the diagnosis and monitoring of GEP-NETs. Furthermore, AJCC version 9 recognizes the increasing role of endoscopy and endoscopic resection in the diagnosis and management of NETs, particularly in the stomach, duodenum, and colorectum. Finally, T1NXM0 has been added to stage I in these disease sites as well as in the appendix.

Advances in Surgery and (Neo) Adjuvant Therapy in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer.

A multimodality approach, which usually includes chemotherapy, surgery, and/or radiotherapy, is optimal for patients with localized pancreatic cancer. The timing and sequence of these interventions depend on anatomic resectability and the biological suitability of the tumor and the patient. Tumors with vascular involvement (ie, borderline resectable/locally advanced) require surgical reassessments after therapy and participation of surgeons familiar with advanced techniques. When indicated, venous reconstruction should be offered as standard of care because it has acceptable morbidity. Morbidity and mortality of pancreas surgery may be mitigated when surgery is performed at high-volume centers.

Comparison study of intraoperative surface acquisition methods on registration accuracy for soft-tissue surgical navigation.

Purpose: To study the difference between rigid registration and nonrigid registration using two forms of digitization (contact and noncontact) in human in vivo liver surgery. Approach: A Conoprobe device attachment and sterilization process was developed to enable prospective noncontact intraoperative acquisition of organ surface data in the operating room (OR). The noncontact Conoprobe digitization method was compared against stylus-based acquisition in the context of image-to-physical registration for image-guided surgical navigation. Data from n=10 patients undergoing liver resection were analyzed under an Institutional Review Board-approved study at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. Organ surface coverage of each surface acquisition method was compared. Registration accuracies resulting from the acquisition techniques were compared for (1) rigid registration method (RRM), (2) model-based nonrigid registration method (NRM) using surface data only, and (3) NRM with one subsurface feature (vena cava) from tracked intraoperative ultrasound (NRM-VC). Novel vessel centerline and tumor targets were segmented and compared to their registered preoperative counterparts for accuracy validation. Results: Surface data coverage collected by stylus and Conoprobe were 24.6%±6.4% and 19.6%±5.0%, respectively. The average difference between stylus data and Conoprobe data using NRM was -1.05 mm and using NRM-VC was -1.42 mm, indicating the registrations to Conoprobe data performed worse than to stylus data with both NRM approaches. However, using the stylus and Conoprobe acquisition methods led to significant improvement of NRM-VC over RRM by average differences of 4.48 and 3.66 mm, respectively. Conclusion: The first use of a sterile-field amenable Conoprobe surface acquisition strategy in the OR is reported for open liver surgery. Under clinical conditions, the nonrigid registration significantly outperformed standard-of-care rigid registration, and acquisition by contact-based stylus and noncontact-based Conoprobe produced similar registration results. The accuracy benefits of noncontact surface acquisition with a Conoprobe are likely obscured by inferior data coverage and intrinsic noise within acquisition systems.

Impact of a non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction (m)FOLFIRINOX: Trans-Atlantic Pancreatic Surgery (TAPS) Consortium study.

BACKGROUND: Surgery in selected patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after induction chemotherapy may have drawbacks related to surgical risks and breaks or delays in oncological treatment, in particular when curative intent resection is not possible (that is non-therapeutic laparotomy). The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and oncological impact of a non-therapeutic laparotomy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with induction (m)FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy. METHODS: This was a retrospective international multicentre study including patients diagnosed with pathology-proven locally advanced pancreatic cancer treated with at least one cycle of (m)FOLFIRINOX (2012-2019). Patients undergoing a non-therapeutic laparotomy (group A) were compared with those not undergoing surgery (group B) and those undergoing resection (group C). RESULTS: Overall, 663 patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer were included (67 patients (10.1%) in group A, 425 patients (64.1%) in group B, and 171 patients (25.8%) in group C). A non-therapeutic laparotomy occurred in 28.2% of all explorations (67 of 238), with occult metastases in 30 patients (30 of 67, 44.8%) and a 90-day mortality rate of 3.0% (2 of 67). Administration of palliative therapy (65.9% versus 73.1%; P = 0.307) and median overall survival (20.4 [95% c.i. 15.9 to 27.3] versus 20.2 [95% c.i. 19.1 to 22.7] months; P = 0.752) did not differ between group A and group B respectively. The median overall survival in group C was 36.1 (95% c.i. 30.5 to 41.2) months. The 5-year overall survival rates were 11.4%, 8.7%, and 24.7% in group A, group B, and group C, respectively. Compared with group B, non-therapeutic laparotomy (group A) was not associated with reduced overall survival (HR = 0.88 [95% c.i. 0.61 to 1.27]). CONCLUSION: More than a quarter of surgically explored patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after induction (m)FOLFIRINOX did not undergo a resection. Such non-therapeutic laparotomy does not appear to substantially impact oncological outcomes.

Improved Clinical Staging System for Localized Pancreatic Cancer Using the ABC Factors: A TAPS Consortium Study.

PURPOSE: Previous studies suggest that besides anatomy (A: resectable, borderline resectable [BR], or locally advanced [LA]) also biologic (B: carbohydrate antigen 19-9 [CA 19-9]) and conditional (C: performance status) factors should be considered when staging patients with localized pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). The prognostic value of the combined ABC factors has not been quantitatively validated. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we evaluated patients with localized PDAC treated with initial (modified) fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin ([m]FOLFIRINOX) at five high-volume pancreatic cancer centers in the United States and the Netherlands (2012-2019). Multivariable Cox proportional hazards analysis was used to investigate the impact of the ABC factors for overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Overall, 1,835 patients with localized PDAC were included. Tumor stage at diagnosis was potentially resectable in 346 (18.9%), BR in 531 (28.9%), and LA in 958 (52.2%) patients. The baseline CA 19-9 was >500 U/mL in 559 patients (32.5%). Performance status was ≥1 in 1,110 patients (60.7%). Independent poor prognostic factors for OS were BR disease (hazard ratio [HR], 1.26 [95% CI, 1.06 to 1.50]), LA disease (HR, 1.71 [95% CI, 1.45 to 2.02]), CA 19-9 >500 U/mL (HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.21 to 1.52]), and WHO performance status ≥1 (HR, 1.31 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.47]). Patients were assigned 1 point for each poor ABC factor and 2 points for LA disease. The median OS for patients with score 0-4 was 49.7, 29.9, 22.0, 19.1, and 14.9 months with corresponding 5-year OS rates of 47.0%, 28.9%, 19.2%, 9.3%, and 4.8%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The ABC factors of tumor anatomy, CA 19-9, and performance status at diagnosis were independent prognostic factors for OS in patients with localized PDAC treated with initial (m)FOLFIRINOX. Staging of patients with localized PDAC at diagnosis should be based on anatomy, CA 19-9, and performance status.

Concordance in Oncogenic Alterations Between the Primary Tumor and Advanced Disease: Insights Into the Heterogeneity of Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICCA) is characterized by significant phenotypic and clinical heterogeneities and poor response to systemic therapy, potentially related to underlying heterogeneity in oncogenic alterations. We aimed to characterize the genomic heterogeneity between primary tumors and advanced disease in patients with ICCA. METHODS: Biopsy-proven CCA specimens (primary tumor and paired advanced disease [metastatic disease, progressive disease on systemic therapy, or postoperative recurrence]) from two institutions were subjected to targeted next-generation sequencing. Overall concordance (oncogenic driver mutations, copy number alterations, and fusion events) and mutational concordance (only oncogenic mutations) were compared across paired samples. A subgroup analysis was performed on the basis of exposure to systemic therapy. Patients with extrahepatic CCA (ECCA) were included as a comparison group. RESULTS: Sample pairs from 65 patients with ICCA (n = 54) and ECCA (n = 11) were analyzed. The median time between sample collection was 19.6 months (range, 2.7-122.9). For the entire cohort, the overall oncogenic concordance was 49% and the mutational concordance was 62% between primary and advanced disease samples. Subgroup analyses of ICCA and ECCA revealed overall/mutational concordance rates of 47%/58% and 60%/84%, respectively. Oncogenic concordance was similarly low for pairs exposed to systemic therapy between sample collections (n = 50, 53% overall, 68% mutational). In patients treated with targeted therapy for IDH1/2 alterations (n = 6) or FGFR2 fusions (n = 3), there was 100% concordance between the primary and advanced disease specimens. In two patients, FGFR2 (n = 1) and IDH1 (n = 1) alterations were detected de novo in the advanced disease specimens. CONCLUSION: The results reflect a high degree of heterogeneity in ICCA and argue for reassessment of the dominant driver mutations with change in disease status.

Are enhanced recovery protocols after pancreatoduodenectomy still efficient when applied in elderly patients? A systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: This meta-analysis investigated the effects of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols compared to conventional care on postoperative outcomes in patients aged 70 years or older undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). METHODS: Five databases were systematically searched. Comparative studies with available individual patient data (IPD) were included. The main outcomes were postoperative morbidity, length of stay, readmission and postoperative functional recovery elements. To assess an age-dependent effect, the group was divided in septuagenarians (70-79 years) and older patients (≥80 years). RESULTS: IPD were obtained from 15 of 31 eligible studies comprising 1109 patients. The overall complication and major complication rates were comparable in both groups (OR 0.92 [95% CI: 0.65-1.29], p = .596 and OR 1.22 [95% CI: 0.61-2.46], p = .508). Length of hospital stay tended to be shorter in the ERAS group compared to the conventional care group (-0.14 days [95% CI: -0.29 to 0.01], p = .071) while readmission rates were comparable and the total length of stay including days in hospital after readmission tended to be shorter in the ERAS group (-0.28 days [95% CI: -0.62 to 0.05], p = .069). In the subgroups, the length of stay was shorter in octogenarians treated with ERAS (-0.36 days [95% CI: -0.71 to -0.004], p = .048). The readmission rate increased slightly but not significantly while the total length of stay was not longer in the ERAS group. CONCLUSION: ERAS in the elderly is safe and its benefits are preserved in the care of even in patients older than 80 years. Standardized care protocol should be encouraged in all pancreatic centers.