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

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection followed by adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) is currently the standard of care for patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. The main concern regarding adjuvant chemotherapy is that only half of patients actually receive adjuvant treatment. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy, on the other hand, guarantees early systemic treatment and may increase chemotherapy use and thereby improve overall survival. Furthermore, it may prevent futile surgery in patients with rapidly progressive disease. However, some argue that neoadjuvant therapy delays surgery, which could lead to progression towards unresectable disease and thus offset the potential benefits. Comparison of perioperative (i.e., neoadjuvant and adjuvant) with (only) adjuvant administration of mFOLFIRINOX in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is needed to determine the optimal approach. METHODS: This multicenter, phase 3, RCT will include 378 patients with resectable pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma with a WHO performance status of 0 or 1. Patients are recruited from 20 Dutch centers and three centers in Norway and Sweden. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial contact and ≤ 90 degrees venous contact. Patients in the intervention arm are scheduled for 8 cycles of neoadjuvant mFOLFIRINOX followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX (2-week cycle of oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, leucovorin 400 mg/m2, irinotecan 150 mg/m2 at day 1, followed by 46 h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil 2400 g/m2). Patients in the comparator arm start with surgery followed by 12 cycles of adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX. The primary outcome is overall survival by intention-to-treat. Secondary outcomes include progression-free survival, resection rate, quality of life, adverse events, and surgical complications. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after the inclusion of 378 patients in 36 months, with analysis planned 18 months after the last patient has been randomized. DISCUSSION: The multicenter PREOPANC-3 trial compares perioperative mFOLFIRINOX with adjuvant mFOLFIRINOX in patients with resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials: NCT04927780. Registered June 16, 2021.

Venous Thromboembolism and Primary Thromboprophylaxis in Perioperative Pancreatic Cancer Care.

Recent studies have shown that patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy followed by surgery have an improved outcome compared to patients treated with upfront surgery. Hence, patients with PDAC are more and more frequently treated with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting. PDAC patients are at a high risk of developing venous thromboembolism (VTE), which is associated with decreased survival rates. As patients with PDAC were historically offered immediate surgical resection, data on VTE incidence and associated preoperative risk factors are scarce. Current guidelines recommend primary prophylactic anticoagulation in selected groups of patients with advanced PDAC. However, recommendations for patients with (borderline) resectable PDAC treated with chemotherapy in the neoadjuvant setting are lacking. Nevertheless, the prevention of complications is crucial to maintain the best possible condition for surgery. This narrative review summarizes current literature on VTE incidence, associated risk factors, risk assessment tools, and primary thromboprophylaxis in PDAC patients treated with neoadjuvant chemo(radio)therapy.

Optimizing patient selection for stereotactic ablative radiotherapy in patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer after initial chemotherapy - a single center prospective cohort.

Background: The role of stereotactic ablative radiation therapy (SABR) as local treatment option after chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is evolving. However adequate patient selection criteria for SABR in patients with LAPC are lacking. Methods: A prospective institutional database collected data of patients with LAPC treated with chemotherapy, mainly FOLFIRINOX, followed by SABR, which was delivered using magnetic resonance guided radiotherapy, 40 Gy in 5 fractions within two weeks. Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Cox regression analyses were performed to identify predictors for OS. Results: Overall, 74 patients were included, median age 66 years, 45.9% had a KPS score of ≥90. Median OS was 19.6 months from diagnosis and 12.1 months from start of SABR. Local control was 90% at one year. Multivariable Cox regression analyses identified KPS ≥90, age <70, and absence of pain prior to SABR as independent favorable predictors for OS. The rate of grade ≥3 fatigue and late gastro-intestinal toxicity was 2.7%. Conclusions: SABR is a well-tolerated treatment in patients with unresectable LAPC following chemotherapy, with better outcomes when applied in patients with higher performance score, age <70 years and absence of pain. Future randomized trials will have to confirm these findings.

Stereotactic ablative radiotherapy or best supportive care in patients with localized pancreatic cancer not receiving chemotherapy and surgery (PANCOSAR): a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial according to a TwiCs design.

BACKGROUND: Significant comorbidities, advanced age, and a poor performance status prevent surgery and systemic treatment for many patients with localized (non-metastatic) pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). These patients are currently treated with 'best supportive care'. Therefore, it is desirable to find a treatment option which could improve both disease control and quality of life in these patients. A brief course of high-dose high-precision radiotherapy i.e. stereotactic ablative body radiotherapy (SABR) may be feasible. METHODS: A nationwide multicenter trial performed within a previously established large prospective cohort (the Dutch Pancreatic cancer project; PACAP) according to the 'Trial within cohorts' (TwiCs) design. Patients enrolled in the PACAP cohort routinely provide informed consent to answer quality of life questionnaires and to be randomized according to the TwiCs design when eligible for a study. Patients with localized PDAC who are unfit for chemotherapy and surgery or those who refrain from these treatments are eligible. Patients will be randomized between SABR (5 fractions of 8 Gy) with 'best supportive care' and 'best supportive care' only. The primary endpoint is overall survival from randomization. Secondary endpoints include preservation of quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30 and -PAN26), NRS pain score response and WHO performance scores at baseline, and, 3, 6 and 12 months. Acute and late toxicity will be scored using CTCAE criteria version 5.0: assessed at baseline, day of last fraction, at 3 and 6 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months following SABR. DISCUSSION: The PANCOSAR trial studies the added value of SBRT as compared to 'best supportive care' in patients with localized PDAC who are medically unfit to receive chemotherapy and surgery, or refrain from these treatments. This study will assess whether SABR, in comparison to best supportive care, can relieve or delay tumor-related symptoms, enhance quality of life, and extend survival in these patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials, NCT05265663 , Registered March 3 2022, Retrospectively registered.

Painful lower limb nodules as first symptom of resectable pancreatic acinar cell cancer: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic panniculitis is characterized by subcutaneous fat necrosis and is a rare presentation of an underlying pancreatic disease, appearing in approximately 2-3% of all patients with a pancreatic disease. The nodules usually involve the lower extremities. Pancreatic panniculitis is commonly associated with acute or chronic pancreatitis, and occasionally with pancreatic cancer, especially acinar cell carcinoma. CASE PRESENTATION: A 77-year-old Caucasian woman with no significant medical history was referred to our center with multiple painful, itchy, and warm red/blue cutaneous nodules on the left lower leg. These skin lesions were consistent with the clinical diagnosis of panniculitis. The skin biopsy obtained showed a predominantly lobular panniculitis with fat necrosis of which the aspect was highly suspicious for pancreatic panniculitis. Further analysis revealed high lipase serum of > 3000 U/L (normal range < 60 U/L), and on computed tomography scan a mass located between the stomach and the left pancreas was seen. Endoscopic ultrasonography-guided fine-needle biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of acinar cell carcinoma. After discussing the patient in the pancreatobiliary multidisciplinary team meeting, laparoscopic distal pancreatectomy including splenectomy and en bloc wedge resection of the stomach due to tumor in-growth was performed. The cutaneous nodules on both legs disappeared 1-2 days after surgery. No long-term complications were reported during follow-up. One year after surgery, the patient presented with similar symptoms as preoperatively. Computed tomography scan showed local recurrence and distal metastases, which were subsequently confirmed by biopsy. She started with palliative folinic acid-fluorouracil-irinotecan-oxaliplatin chemotherapy but stopped after two cycles because of disease progression. The patient died 2 months later, 13 months after surgical resection. CONCLUSION: This case illustrates the importance of clinically recognizing cutaneous nodules and pathological recognizing the specific microscopic changes as sign of a (malignant) pancreatic disease.

A nationwide randomized controlled trial on additional treatment for isolated local pancreatic cancer recurrence using stereotactic body radiation therapy (ARCADE).

BACKGROUND: Disease recurrence is the main cause of mortality after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). In 20-30% of resected patients, isolated local PDAC recurrence occurs. Retrospective studies have suggested that stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) might lead to improved local control in these patients, potentially having a beneficial effect on both survival and quality of life. The "nationwide randomized controlled trial on additional treatment for isolated local pancreatic cancer recurrence using stereotactic body radiation therapy" (ARCADE) will investigate the value of SBRT in addition to standard of care in patients with isolated local PDAC recurrence compared to standard of care alone, regarding both survival and quality of life outcomes. METHODS: The ARCADE trial is nested within a prospective cohort (Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project; PACAP) according to the 'Trials within Cohorts' design. All PACAP participants with isolated local PDAC recurrence after primary resection who provided informed consent for being randomized in future studies are eligible. Patients will be randomized for local therapy (5 fractions of 8 Gy SBRT) in addition to standard of care or standard of care alone. In total, 174 patients will be included. The main study endpoint is survival after recurrence. The most important secondary endpoint is quality of life. DISCUSSION: It is hypothesized that additional SBRT, compared to standard of care alone, improves survival and quality of life in patients with isolated local recurrence after PDAC resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration NCT04881487 . Registered on May 11, 2021.

Oncologic management of ampullary cancer: International survey among surgical and medical oncologists.

BACKGROUND: Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AAC) is a rare neoplasm which as a result is lacking specific treatment guidelines. This international survey study was performed to gain insight in the current daily practice of AAC. METHODS: Surgeons and medical oncologists, whom were members of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group, International Study Group on Ampullary Cancer, International Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association, European and International Consortium on Minimally Invasive Pancreatic Surgery, or contributed to (peri)ampullary cancer research, were invited through email and newsletters between January and October 2021. RESULTS: Overall, 217 surgeons and medical oncologists completed the survey. Most of the respondents work in Europe (60%), and in a pancreatic expertise center (86%). The majority of respondents (87%) stated that the histological AAC subtype (e.g. intestinal vs. pancreatobiliary) was determined in the resection specimen. Neoadjuvant treatment for resectable disease was considered by 24% and adjuvant therapy by 90% of the respondents, with 80% of them choosing adjuvant chemotherapy alone. The formation of multidisciplinary teams, improvement in resection procedures, increased availability of chemotherapy regimens, and increased knowledge on tumor biology were considered as the most important developments in the last five years. The necessity for randomized controlled trials was mentioned by 50% of the respondents. CONCLUSIONS: This international survey highlights the existing variation in the management of patients with AAC, especially regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant therapy. More data from trials and international registries are needed to develop evidence-based guidelines on surgical and oncological management with the ultimate aim to improve outcomes for patients with AAC.

Radiofrequency ablation and chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (PELICAN): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 80% of patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) are treated with chemotherapy, of whom approximately 10% undergo a resection. Cohort studies investigating local tumor ablation with radiofrequency ablation (RFA) have reported a promising overall survival of 26-34 months when given in a multimodal setting. However, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of RFA in combination with chemotherapy in patients with LAPC are lacking. METHODS: The "Pancreatic Locally Advanced Unresectable Cancer Ablation" (PELICAN) trial is an international multicenter superiority RCT, initiated by the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (DPCG). All patients with LAPC according to DPCG criteria, who start with FOLFIRINOX or (nab-paclitaxel/)gemcitabine, are screened for eligibility. Restaging is performed after completion of four cycles of FOLFIRINOX or two cycles of (nab-paclitaxel/)gemcitabine (i.e., 2 months of treatment), and the results are assessed within a nationwide online expert panel. Eligible patients with RECIST stable disease or objective response, in whom resection is not feasible, are randomized to RFA followed by chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone. In total, 228 patients will be included in 16 centers in The Netherlands and four other European centers. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, RECIST response, CA 19.9 and CEA response, toxicity, quality of life, pain, costs, and immunomodulatory effects of RFA. DISCUSSION: The PELICAN RCT aims to assess whether the combination of chemotherapy and RFA improves the overall survival when compared to chemotherapy alone, in patients with LAPC with no progression of disease following 2 months of systemic treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Registry NL4997 . Registered on December 29, 2015. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03690323 . Retrospectively registered on October 1, 2018.

Total neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX versus neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine for resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer (PREOPANC-2 trial): study protocol for a nationwide multicenter randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant therapy has several potential advantages over upfront surgery in patients with localized pancreatic cancer; more patients receive systemic treatment, fewer patients undergo futile surgery, and R0 resection rates are higher, thereby possibly improving overall survival (OS). Two recent randomized trials have suggested benefit of neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy over upfront surgery, both including single-agent chemotherapy regimens. Potentially, the multi-agent FOLFIRINOX regimen (5-fluorouracil with leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) may further improve outcomes in the neoadjuvant setting for localized pancreatic cancer, but randomized studies are needed. The PREOPANC-2 trial investigates whether neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX improves OS compared with neoadjuvant gemcitabine-based chemoradiotherapy and adjuvant gemcitabine in resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer patients. METHODS: This nationwide multicenter phase III randomized controlled trial includes patients with pathologically confirmed resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer with a WHO performance score of 0 or 1. Resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as no arterial and ≤ 90 degrees venous involvement; borderline resectable pancreatic cancer is defined as ≤90 degrees arterial and ≤ 270 degrees venous involvement without occlusion. Patients receive 8 cycles of neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX chemotherapy followed by surgery without adjuvant treatment (arm A), or 3 cycles of neoadjuvant gemcitabine with hypofractionated radiotherapy (36 Gy in 15 fractions) during the second cycle, followed by surgery and 4 cycles of adjuvant gemcitabine (arm B). The primary endpoint is OS by intention-to-treat. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, quality of life, resection rate, and R0 resection rate. To detect a hazard ratio of 0.70 with 80% power, 252 events are needed. The number of events is expected to be reached after inclusion of 368 eligible patients assuming an accrual period of 3 years and 1.5 years follow-up. DISCUSSION: The PREOPANC-2 trial directly compares two neoadjuvant regimens for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. Our study will provide evidence on the neoadjuvant treatment of choice for patients with resectable and borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Primary registry and trial identifying number: EudraCT: 2017-002036-17 . Date of registration: March 6, 2018. Secondary identifying numbers: The Netherlands National Trial Register - NL7094 , NL61961.078.17, MEC-2018-004.

The treatment and survival of elderly patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry.

BACKGROUND: The treatment options for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) have improved in recent years and consequently survival has increased. It is unknown, however, if elderly patients benefit from these improvements in therapy. With the ongoing aging of the patient population and an increasing incidence of pancreatic cancer, this patient group becomes more relevant. This study aims to clarify the association between increasing age, treatment and overall survival in patients with LAPC. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter registry including consecutive patients with LAPC, who were registered in 14 centers of the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Group (April 2015-December 2017). Patients were divided in three groups according to age (<65, 65-74 and ≥75 years). Primary outcome was overall survival stratified by primary treatment strategy. Multivariable regression analyses were performed to adjust for possible confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 422 patients with LAPC were included; 162 patients (38%) aged <65 years, 182 patients (43%) aged 65-74 and 78 patients (19%) aged ≥75 years. Chemotherapy was administered in 86%, 81% and 50% of the patients in the different age groups (p<0.01). Median overall survival was 12, 11 and 7 months for the different age groups (p<0.01).Patients treated with chemotherapy showed comparable median overall survival of 13, 14 and 10 months for the different age groups (p=0.11). When adjusted for confounders, age was not associated with overall survival. CONCLUSION: Elderly patients are less likely to be treated with chemotherapy, but when treated with chemotherapy, their survival is comparable to younger patients.

Molecular targets for diagnostic and intraoperative imaging of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment.

Neoadjuvant systemic treatment is increasingly being integrated in the standard treatment of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients to improve oncological outcomes. Current available imaging techniques remain unreliable in assessing response to therapies, as they cannot distinguish between (vital) tumor tissue and therapy induced fibrosis (TIF). Consequently, resections with tumor positive margins and subsequent early post-operative recurrences occur and patients eligible for potential radical resection could be missed. To optimize patient selection and monitor results of neoadjuvant treatment, PDAC-specific diagnostic and intraoperative molecular imaging methods are required. This study aims to evaluate molecular imaging targets for PDAC after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment. Expression of integrin αvß6, carcinoembryonic antigen cell adhesion molecule 5 (CEACAM5), mesothelin, prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA), urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor, fibroblast activating receptor, integrin α5 subunit and epidermal growth factor receptor was evaluated using immunohistochemistry. Immunoreactivity was determined using the semiquantitative H-score. Resection specimens from patients after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment containing PDAC (n = 32), tumor associated pancreatitis (TAP) and TIF (n = 15), normal pancreas parenchyma (NPP) (n = 32) and tumor positive (n = 24) and negative (n = 56) lymph nodes were included. Integrin αvß6, CEACAM5, mesothelin and PSMA stainings showed significantly higher expression in PDAC compared to TAP and NPP. No expression of αvß6, CEACAM5 and mesothelin was observed in TIF. Integrin αvß6 and CEACAM5 allow for accurate metastatic lymph node detection. Targeting integrin αvß6, CEA, mesothelin and PSMA has the potential to distinguish vital PDAC from fibrotic tissue after neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX treatment. Integrin αvß6 and CEACAM5 detect primary tumors and tumor positive lymph nodes.

Advances in adjuvant therapy of biliary tract cancer: an overview of current clinical evidence based on phase II and III trials.

Patients with biliary tract cancer (BTC) have a high recurrence rate after complete surgical resection. To reduce the risk of recurrence and to improve survival, several chemotherapeutic agents that have shown to be active in locally advanced and metastatic BTC have been investigated in the adjuvant setting in prospective clinical trials. Based on the results of the BILCAP phase III trial, capecitabine was adapted as the standard of care by the ASCO clinical practice guideline. Ongoing randomized controlled trials mainly compare capecitabine with gemcitabine-based chemotherapy or chemoradiotherapy. This review provides an update of adjuvant therapy in BTC based on published data of phase II and III trials and ongoing randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

Gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy in subtypes of ampullary adenocarcinoma: international propensity score-matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Whether patients who undergo resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma have a survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy is currently unknown. The aim of this study was to compare survival between patients with and without adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of ampullary adenocarcinoma in a propensity score-matched analysis. METHODS: An international multicentre cohort study was conducted, including patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma between 2006 and 2017, in 13 centres in six countries. Propensity scores were used to match patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy with those who did not, in the entire cohort and in two subgroups (pancreatobiliary/mixed and intestinal subtypes). Survival was assessed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Overall, 1163 patients underwent pancreatoduodenectomy for ampullary adenocarcinoma. After excluding 187 patients, median survival in the remaining 976 patients was 67 (95 per cent c.i. 56 to 78) months. A total of 520 patients (53·3 per cent) received adjuvant chemotherapy. In a propensity score-matched cohort (194 patients in each group), survival was better among patients who received adjuvant chemotherapy than in those who did not (median survival not reached versus 60 months respectively; P = 0·051). A survival benefit was seen in patients with the pancreatobiliary/mixed subtype; median survival was not reached in patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy and 32 months in the group without chemotherapy (P = 0·020). Patients with the intestinal subtype did not show any survival benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Patients with resected ampullary adenocarcinoma may benefit from gemcitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy, but this effect may be reserved for those with the pancreatobiliary and/or mixed subtype.

ANTECEDENTES: Actualmente se desconoce si la quimioterapia adyuvante ofrece un beneficio en la supervivencia de los pacientes que se someten a resección de un adenocarcinoma ampular. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la supervivencia mediante la concordancia estimada por emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión, entre pacientes con y sin quimioterapia adyuvante después de la resección de un adenocarcinoma ampular. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un estudio internacional de cohortes multicéntrico, que incluyó a los pacientes que se sometieron a una duodenopancreatectomía por adenocarcinoma ampular (2006-2017) en 13 centros de seis países. Los puntajes de propensión se usaron para emparejar a los pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante con los que no; tanto en la cohorte completa como en dos subgrupos (subtipo pancreaticobiliar / mixto e intestinal). La supervivencia se evaluó utilizando el método de Kaplan-Meier y las regresiones de Cox. RESULTADOS: En total, 1.163 pacientes fueron sometidos a una duodenopancreatectomía por adenocarcinoma ampular. Después de excluir a 179 pacientes, la mediana de supervivencia de los 976 pacientes restantes fue de 67 meses (i.c. del 95%, 56-78), de los cuales un total de 520 pacientes (53%) recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante. En una cohorte de emparejamiento por puntaje de propensión (194 versus 194 pacientes), la mediana de supervivencia fue mejor en los pacientes tratados con quimioterapia adyuvante en comparación con aquellos sin quimioterapia adyuvante (no se alcanzó la mediana de supervivencia versus 60 meses, respectivamente; P = 0,051). En el subtipo pancreaticobiliar/mixto se observó un beneficio en la supervivencia; no se alcanzó la mediana de supervivencia en pacientes que recibieron quimioterapia adyuvante versus 32 meses en el grupo sin quimioterapia, P = 0,020. El subtipo intestinal no mostró beneficio en la supervivencia de la quimioterapia adyuvante. CONCLUSIÓN: Los pacientes con adenocarcinoma ampular resecado pueden beneficiarse de la quimioterapia adyuvante basada en gemcitabina, pero este efecto podría reservarse para aquellos pacientes con subtipo de tumor pancreaticobiliar y/o mixto.

Postoperative surveillance of pancreatic cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study is to collect the best available evidence for diagnostic modalities, frequency, and duration of surveillance after resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). METHODS: PDAC guidelines published after 2015 were collected. Furthermore, a systematic search of the literature on postoperative surveillance was performed in PubMed and Embase from 2000 to 2019. Articles comparing different diagnostic modalities and frequencies of postoperative surveillance in PDAC patients with regard to survival, quality of life, morbidity and cost-effectiveness were selected. RESULTS: The literature search resulted in 570 articles. A total of seven guidelines and twelve original clinical studies were eventually evaluated. PDAC guidelines increasingly recommend a combination of tumor marker testing and computed tomography (CT) imaging every three to six months during the first two years after resection. These guidelines are, however, based on expert opinion and other low-level evidence. Prospective studies comparing different surveillance strategies are lacking. According to recent studies, surveillance with tumor markers and imaging at regular intervals results in the detection of PDAC recurrence before the onset of symptoms and more frequent administration of further therapy, such as chemotherapy or radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Current evidence for recurrence-focused surveillance after PDAC resection is limited and contradictory. Consequently, recommendations on surveillance are conflicting. To define the clinical merit of recurrence-focused surveillance, patients who are most likely to benefit from early detection and treatment of PDAC recurrence need to be identified. To this purpose, well-designed prospective studies are needed, accounting for both economical and psychosocial implications of surveillance.

Systematic review of clinical prediction models for survival after surgery for resectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: As more therapeutic options for pancreatic cancer are becoming available, there is a need to improve outcome prediction to support shared decision-making. A systematic evaluation of prediction models in resectable pancreatic cancer is lacking. METHODS: This systematic review followed the CHARMS and PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched up to 11 October 2017. Studies reporting development or validation of models predicting survival in resectable pancreatic cancer were included. Models without performance measures, reviews, abstracts or more than 10 per cent of patients not undergoing resection in postoperative models were excluded. Studies were appraised critically. RESULTS: After screening 4403 studies, 22 (44 319 patients) were included. There were 19 model development/update studies and three validation studies, altogether concerning 21 individual models. Two studies were deemed at low risk of bias. Eight models were developed for the preoperative setting and 13 for the postoperative setting. Most frequently included parameters were differentiation grade (11 of 21 models), nodal status (8 of 21) and serum albumin (7 of 21). Treatment-related variables were included in three models. The C-statistic/area under the curve values ranged from 0·57 to 0·90. Based on study design, validation methods and the availability of web-based calculators, two models were identified as the most promising. CONCLUSION: Although a large number of prediction models for resectable pancreatic cancer have been reported, most are at high risk of bias and have not been validated externally. This overview of prognostic factors provided practical recommendations that could help in designing easily applicable prediction models to support shared decision-making.

Meta-analysis comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Studies comparing upfront surgery with neoadjuvant treatment in pancreatic cancer may report only patients who underwent resection and so survival will be skewed. The aim of this study was to report survival by intention to treat in a comparison of upfront surgery versus neoadjuvant treatment in resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched for studies reporting median overall survival by intention to treat in patients with resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer treated with or without neoadjuvant treatment. Secondary outcomes included overall and R0 resection rate, pathological lymph node rate, reasons for unresectability and toxicity of neoadjuvant treatment. RESULTS: In total, 38 studies were included with 3484 patients, of whom 1738 (49·9 per cent) had neoadjuvant treatment. The weighted median overall survival by intention to treat was 18·8 months for neoadjuvant treatment and 14·8 months for upfront surgery; the difference was larger among patients whose tumours were resected (26·1 versus 15·0 months respectively). The overall resection rate was lower with neoadjuvant treatment than with upfront surgery (66·0 versus 81·3 per cent; P < 0·001), but the R0 rate was higher (86·8 (95 per cent c.i. 84·6 to 88·7) versus 66·9 (64·2 to 69·6) per cent; P < 0·001). Reported by intention to treat, the R0 rates were 58·0 and 54·9 per cent respectively (P = 0·088). The pathological lymph node rate was 43·8 per cent after neoadjuvant therapy and 64·8 per cent in the upfront surgery group (P < 0·001). Toxicity of at least grade III was reported in up to 64 per cent of the patients. CONCLUSION: Neoadjuvant treatment appears to improve overall survival by intention to treat, despite lower overall resection rates for resectable or borderline resectable pancreatic cancer. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42016049374.

Remarkable effects of imatinib in a family with young onset gastrointestinal stromal tumors and cutaneous hyperpigmentation associated with a germline KIT-Trp557Arg mutation: case report and literature overview.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) occur mostly sporadically. GISTs associated with a familial syndrome are very rare and are mostly wild type for KIT and platelet-derived growth factor alpha (PDGFRA). To date 35 kindreds and 8 individuals have been described with GISTs associated with germline KIT mutations. This is the third family described with a germline p.Trp557Arg mutation in exon 11 of the KIT gene. The effect of imatinib in patients harboring a germline KIT mutation has been rarely described. Moreover, in some studies imatinib treatment was withheld considering the lack of evidence for efficacy of this treatment in GIST patients harboring a germline KIT mutation. This paper describes a 52-year old patient with a de novo germline p.Trp557Arg mutation with multiple GISTs throughout the gastrointestinal tract and cutaneous hyperpigmentation. Imatinib treatment showed long-term regression of the GISTs and evident pathological response was seen after resection. Remarkably, the hyperpigmentation of the skin also diminished during imatinib treatment. Genetic screening of the family revealed the same mutation in two daughters, both with similar cutaneous hyperpigmentation. One daughter, aged 23, was diagnosed with multiple small intestine GISTs, which were resected. She was treated with adjuvant imatinib which prompted rapid regression of the cutaneous hyperpigmentation. Imatinib treatment in GIST patients harboring a germline KIT mutation shows favorable and long-term responses in both the tumor and the phenotypical hyperpigmentation.

Translating the ABC-02 trial into daily practice: outcome of palliative treatment in patients with unresectable biliary tract cancer treated with gemcitabine and cisplatin.

BACKGROUND: Biliary tract cancer (BTC) is an uncommon cancer with an unfavorable prognosis. Since 2010, the standard of care for patients with unresectable BTC is palliative treatment with gemcitabine plus cisplatin, based on the landmark phase III ABC-02 trial. This current study aims to evaluate the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with unresectable cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder cancer in daily practice that meet the criteria for the ABC-02 trial in comparison to patients who did not. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with unresectable BTC between 2010 and 2015 with an indication for gemcitabine and cisplatin were included. We divided these patients into three groups: (I) patients who received chemotherapy and met the criteria of the ABC-02 trial, (II) patients who received chemotherapy and did not meet these criteria and (III) patients who had an indication for chemotherapy, but received best supportive care without chemotherapy. Primary outcome was overall survival (OS) and secondary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We collected data of 208 patients, of which 138 (66.3%) patients received first line chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Median OS of 69 patients in group I, 63 patients in group II and 65 patients in group III was 9.6 months (95%CI = 6.7-12.5), 9.5 months (95%CI = 7.7-11.3) and 7.6 months (95%CI = 5.0-10.2), respectively. Median PFS was 6.0 months (95%CI = 4.4-7.6) in group I and 5.1 months (95%CI = 3.7-6.5) in group II. Toxicity and number of dose reductions (p = .974) were comparable between the two chemotherapy groups. CONCLUSION: First-line gemcitabine and cisplatin is an effective and safe treatment for patients with unresectable BTC who do not meet the eligibility criteria for the ABC-02 trial. Median OS, PFS and treatment side effects were comparable between the patients who received chemotherapy (group I vs. group II).