RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Distinguishing postoperative fibrosis from isolated local recurrence (ILR) after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is challenging. A prognostic model that helps to identify patients at risk of ILR can assist clinicians when evaluating patients' postoperative imaging. This nationwide study aimed to develop a clinically applicable prognostic model for ILR after PDAC resection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational cohort study was performed, including all patients who underwent PDAC resection in the Netherlands (2014-2019; NCT04605237). On the basis of recurrence location (ILR, systemic, or both), multivariable cause-specific Cox-proportional hazard analysis was conducted to identify predictors for ILR and presented as hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). A predictive model was developed using Akaike's Information Criterion, and bootstrapped discrimination and calibration indices were assessed. RESULTS: Among 1194/1693 patients (71%) with recurrence, 252 patients (21%) developed ILR. Independent predictors for ILR were resectability status (borderline versus resectable, HR 1.42; 95% CI 1.03-1.96; P = 0.03, and locally advanced versus resectable, HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.68-1.82; P = 0.66), tumor location (head versus body/tail, HR 1.50; 95% CI 1.00-2.25; P = 0.05), vascular resection (HR 1.86; 95% CI 1.41-2.45; P < 0.001), perineural invasion (HR 1.47; 95% CI 1.01-2.13; P = 0.02), number of positive lymph nodes (HR 1.04; 95% CI 1.01-1.08; P = 0.02), and resection margin status (R1 < 1 mm versus R0 ≥ 1 mm, HR 1.64; 95% CI 1.25-2.14; P < 0.001). Moderate performance (concordance index 0.66) with adequate calibration (slope 0.99) was achieved. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide study identified factors predictive of ILR after PDAC resection. Our prognostic model, available through www.pancreascalculator.com , can be utilized to identify patients with a higher a priori risk of developing ILR, providing important information in patient evaluation and prognostication.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Humanos , Irinotecán/uso terapéutico , Oxaliplatino/uso terapéutico , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/efectos adversos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Terapia Neoadyuvante/métodos , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Adyuvantes Inmunológicos/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Surveillance of individuals at risk of developing pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has the potential to improve survival, yet early detection based on solely imaging modalities is challenging. We aimed to identify changes in serum glycosylation levels over time to earlier detect PDAC in high-risk individuals. METHODS: Individuals with a hereditary predisposition to develop PDAC were followed in two surveillance programs. Those, of which at least two consecutive serum samples were available, were included. Mass spectrometry analysis was performed to determine the total N-glycome for each consecutive sample. Potentially discriminating N-glycans were selected based on our previous cross-sectional analysis and relative abundances were calculated for each glycosylation feature. RESULTS: 165 individuals ("FPC-cohort" N = 119; Leiden cohort N = 46) were included. In total, 97 (59%) individuals had a genetic predisposition (77 CDKN2A, 15 BRCA1/2, 5 STK11) and 68 (41%) a family history of PDAC without a known genetic predisposition (>10-fold increased risk of developing PDAC). From each individual, a median number of 3 serum samples (IQR 3) was collected. Ten individuals (6%) developed PDAC during 35 months of follow-up; nine (90%) of these patients carried a CDKN2A germline mutation. In PDAC cases, compared to all controls, glycosylation characteristics were increased (fucosylation, tri- and tetra-antennary structures, specific sialic linkage types), others decreased (complex-type diantennary and bisected glycans). The largest change over time was observed for tri-antennary fucosylated glycans, which were able to differentiate cases from controls with a specificity of 92%, sensitivity of 49% and accuracy of 90%. CONCLUSION: Serum N-glycan monitoring may support early detection in a pancreas surveillance program.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Proteínas Sanguíneas/genética , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/genética , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/metabolismo , Estudios Transversales , Detección Precoz del Cáncer , Predisposición Genética a la Enfermedad , Humanos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/genética , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/metabolismo , Polisacáridos/metabolismo , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Despite the fact that primary percutaneous catheter drainage has become standard practice, some patients with pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy ultimately undergo a relaparotomy. The aim of this study was to compare completion pancreatectomy with a pancreas-preserving procedure in patients undergoing relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study of nine institutions included patients who underwent relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy from 2005-2018. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: From 4877 patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy, 786 (16 per cent) developed a pancreatic fistula grade B/C and 162 (3 per cent) underwent a relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula. Of these patients, 36 (22 per cent) underwent a completion pancreatectomy and 126 (78 per cent) a pancreas-preserving procedure. Mortality was higher after completion pancreatectomy (20 (56 per cent) versus 40 patients (32 per cent); P = 0.009), which remained after adjusting for sex, age, BMI, ASA score, previous reintervention, and organ failure in the 24 h before relaparotomy (adjusted odds ratio 2.55, 95 per cent c.i. 1.07 to 6.08). The proportion of additional reinterventions was not different between groups (23 (64 per cent) versus 84 patients (67 per cent); P = 0.756). The meta-analysis including 33 studies evaluating 745 patients, confirmed the association between completion pancreatectomy and mortality (Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model: odds ratio 1.99, 95 per cent c.i. 1.03 to 3.84). CONCLUSION: Based on the current data, a pancreas-preserving procedure seems preferable to completion pancreatectomy in patients in whom a relaparotomy is deemed necessary for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy.
Asunto(s)
Drenaje/métodos , Laparotomía/métodos , Pancreatectomía/métodos , Fístula Pancreática/cirugía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/cirugía , Estudios de Cohortes , Salud Global , Humanos , Incidencia , Periodo Intraoperatorio , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Fístula Pancreática/epidemiología , Fístula Pancreática/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Reoperación , Tasa de Supervivencia/tendenciasRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Quimioradioterapia/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/administración & dosificación , Desoxicitidina/análogos & derivados , Desoxicitidina/uso terapéutico , Fluorouracilo/administración & dosificación , Humanos , Irinotecán/administración & dosificación , Leucovorina/administración & dosificación , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Oxaliplatino/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , GemcitabinaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The prognosis of patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is poor and selection of patients for surgery is challenging. This study examined the impact of a positive resection margin (R1) on locoregional recurrence (LRR) and overall survival (OS); and also aimed to identified tumour characteristics and/or technical factors associated with a positive resection margin in patients with PDAC. METHODS: Patients scheduled for pancreatic resection for PDAC between 2006 and 2016 were identified from an institutional database. The effect of resection margin status, patient characteristics and tumour characteristics on LRR, distant metastasis and OS was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 322 patients underwent pancreatectomy for PDAC. A positive resection (R1) margin was found in 129 patients (40·1 per cent); this was associated with decreased OS compared with that in patients with an R0 margin (median 15 (95 per cent c.i. 13 to 17) versus 22 months; P < 0·001). R1 status was associated with reduced time to LRR (median 16 versus 36 (not estimated, n.e.) months; P = 0·002). Disease recurrence patterns were similar in the R1 and R0 groups. Risk factors for early recurrence were tumour stage, positive lymph nodes (N1) and perineural invasion. Among 100 patients with N0 disease, R1 status was associated with shorter OS compared with R0 resection (median 17 (10 to 24) versus 45 (n.e.) months; P = 0·002), whereas R status was not related to OS in 222 patients with N1 disease (median 14 (12 to 16) versus 17 (15 to 19) months after R1 and R0 resection respectively; P = 0·068). CONCLUSION: Although pancreatic resection with a positive margin was associated with poor survival and early recurrence, particularly in patients with N1 disease, disease recurrence patterns were similar between R1 and R0 groups.
Asunto(s)
Márgenes de Escisión , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/epidemiología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Anciano , Femenino , Humanos , Metástasis Linfática , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/mortalidad , Recurrencia Local de Neoplasia/cirugía , Pancreatectomía/métodos , Pancreatectomía/mortalidad , Pancreatectomía/estadística & datos numéricos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de RiesgoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Postpancreatectomy haemorrhage (PPH) and venous thromboembolism (VTE) are serious complications following pancreatic surgery. The aim was to assess the timing, occurrence and predictors of PPH and VTE. METHODS: Elective pancreatic resections undertaken in a single university hospital between November 2013 and September 2017 were assessed. Three intervals were reviewed, each with a different routine regimen of nadroparin: 2850 units once daily (single dose) administered in hospital only, or 5700 units once daily (double dose) or 2850 units twice daily (split dose) administered in hospital and continued for 6 weeks after surgery. Clinically relevant PPH (CR-PPH) was classified according to International Study Group of Pancreatic Surgery criteria. VTE was defined according to a number of key diagnostic criteria within 6 weeks of surgery. Cox regression analyses were performed to test the hypotheses that the double-dose group would experience more PPH than the other two groups, the single-dose group would experience more VTE than the other two groups, and the split-dose group would experience the fewest adverse events (PPH or VTE). RESULTS: In total, 240 patients were included, 80 per group. The double-dose group experienced significantly more CR-PPH (hazard ratio (HR) 2·14, 95 per cent c.i. 1·16 to 3·94; P = 0·015). More relaparotomies due to CR-PPH were performed in the double-dose group (16 versus 3·8 per cent; P = 0·002). The single-dose group did not experience more VTE (HR 1·41, 0·43 to 4·62; P = 0·570). The split dose was not associated with fewer adverse events (HR 0·77, 0·41 to 1·46; P = 0·422). Double-dose low molecular weight heparin (LMWH), high BMI and pancreatic fistula were independent predictors of CR-PPH. CONCLUSION: A double dose of LMWH prophylaxis continued for 6 weeks after pancreatic resection was associated with a twofold higher rate of CR-PPH, resulting in four times more relaparotomies. Patients receiving a single daily dose of LMWH in hospital only did not experience a higher rate of VTE.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/administración & dosificación , Nadroparina/administración & dosificación , Pancreatectomía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía , Cuidados Posoperatorios/métodos , Hemorragia Posoperatoria/prevención & control , Tromboembolia Venosa/prevención & control , Anciano , Anticoagulantes/uso terapéutico , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Esquema de Medicación , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Nadroparina/uso terapéutico , Hemorragia Posoperatoria/diagnóstico , Hemorragia Posoperatoria/epidemiología , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tromboembolia Venosa/diagnóstico , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Tromboembolia Venosa/etiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The EUropean REgistration of Cancer CAre (EURECCA) consortium aims to investigate differences in treatment and to improve cancer care through Europe. The purpose of this study was to compare neo- and adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) and outcome after tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma stage I and II in the EURECCA Pancreas consortium. METHODS: The eight, collaborating national, regional, and single-center partners shared their anonymized dataset. Patients diagnosed in 2012-2013 who underwent tumor resection for pancreatic adenocarcinoma stage I and II were investigated with respect to treatment and survival and compared using uni- and multivariable logistic and Cox regression analyses. All comparisons were performed separately per registry type: national, regional, and single-center registries. RESULTS: In total, 2052 patients were included. Stage II was present in the majority of patients. The use of neo-ACT was limited in most registries (range 2.8-15.5%) and was only different between Belgium and The Netherlands after adjustment for potential confounders. The use of ACT was different between the registries (range 40.5-70.0%), even after adjustment for potential confounders. Ninety-day mortality was also different between the registries (range 0.9-13.6%). In multivariable analyses for overall survival, differences were observed between the national and regional registries. Furthermore, patients in ascending age groups and patients with stage II showed a significant worse overall survival. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a clear insight in clinical practice in the EURECCA Pancreas consortium. The differences observed in (neo-)ACT and outcome give us the chance to further investigate the best practices and improve outcome of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
Asunto(s)
Adenocarcinoma/mortalidad , Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Terapia Neoadyuvante/mortalidad , Pancreatectomía/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Adenocarcinoma/patología , Adenocarcinoma/terapia , Anciano , Quimioterapia Adyuvante , Estudios de Cohortes , Terapia Combinada , Recolección de Datos , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del Tratamiento , Neoplasias PancreáticasRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Postoperative ileus is a common complication of abdominal surgery, leading to patient discomfort, morbidity and prolonged postoperative length of hospital stay (LOS). Previous studies suggested that chewing gum stimulates bowel function after abdominal surgery, but were underpowered to evaluate its effect on LOS and did not include enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS)-based perioperative care. This study evaluated whether chewing gum after elective abdominal surgery reduces LOS and time to bowel recovery in the setting of ERAS-based perioperative care. METHODS: A multicentre RCT was performed of patients over 18 years of age undergoing abdominal surgery in 12 hospitals. Standard postoperative care (control group) was compared with chewing gum three times a day for 30 min in addition to standard postoperative care. Randomization was computer-generated; allocation was concealed. The primary outcome was postoperative LOS. Secondary outcomes were time to bowel recovery and 30-day complications. RESULTS: Between 2011 to 2015, 1000 patients were assigned to chewing gum and 1000 to the control arm. Median LOS did not differ: 7 days in both arms (P = 0·364). Neither was any difference found in time to flatus (24 h in control group versus 23 h with chewing gum; P = 0·873) or time to defaecation (60 versus 52 h respectively; P = 0·562). The rate of 30-day complications was not significantly different either. CONCLUSION: The addition of chewing gum to an ERAS postoperative care pathway after elective abdominal surgery does not reduce the LOS, time to bowel recovery or the rate of postoperative complications. Registration number: NTR2594 (Netherlands Trial Register).
Asunto(s)
Abdomen/cirugía , Goma de Mascar , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Electivos/efectos adversos , Ileus/prevención & control , Laparoscopía/efectos adversos , Laparotomía/efectos adversos , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Defecación , Femenino , Flatulencia , Motilidad Gastrointestinal , Humanos , Ileus/etiología , Tiempo de Internación , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Cooperación del Paciente , Cuidados Posoperatorios , Recuperación de la Función , Factores de Tiempo , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Previous studies suggested a relationship between aspirin use and mortality reduction. The mechanism for the effect of aspirin on cancer outcomes remains unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate aspirin use and survival in patients with gastrointestinal tract cancer. METHODS: Patients with gastrointestinal tract cancer diagnosed between 1998 and 2011 were included. The population-based Eindhoven Cancer Registry was linked to drug-dispensing data from the PHARMO Database Network. The association between aspirin use after diagnosis and overall survival was analysed using Cox regression models. RESULTS: In total, 13 715 patients were diagnosed with gastrointestinal cancer. A total of 1008 patients were identified as aspirin users, and 8278 patients were identified as nonusers. The adjusted hazard ratio for aspirin users vs nonusers was 0.52 (95% CI 0.44-0.63). A significant association between aspirin use and survival was observed for patients with oesophageal, hepatobiliary and colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Post-diagnosis use of aspirin in patients with gastrointestinal tract malignancies is associated with increased survival in cancers with different sites of origin and biology. This adds weight to the hypothesis that the anti-cancer effects of aspirin are not tumour-site specific and may be modulated through the tumour micro-environment.
Asunto(s)
Aspirina/administración & dosificación , Neoplasias Gastrointestinales/mortalidad , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Análisis de Supervivencia , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Surveillance programmes are recommended for individuals at risk (IAR) of familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) to detect early pancreatic cancer (pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma, PDAC). However, the age to begin screening and the optimal screening protocol remain to be determined. METHODS: IAR from non-CDKN2A FPC families underwent annual screening by MRI with endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) in board-approved prospective screening programmes at three tertiary referral centres. The diagnostic yield according to age and different screening protocols was analysed. RESULTS: 253 IAR with a median age of 48 (25-81)â years underwent screening with a median of 3 (1-11) screening visits during a median follow-up of 28 (1-152)â months. 134 (53%) IAR revealed pancreatic lesions on imaging, mostly cystic (94%), on baseline or follow-up screening. Lesions were significantly more often identified in IAR above the age of 45â years (p<0.0001). In 21 IAR who underwent surgery, no significant lesions (PDAC, pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasia (PanIN) 3 lesions, high-grade intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasia (IPMN)) were detected before the age of 50â years. Potentially relevant lesions (multifocal PanIN2 lesions, low/moderate-grade branch-duct IPMNs) occurred also significantly more often after the age of 50â years (13 vs 2, p<0.0004). The diagnostic yield of potentially relevant lesions was not different between screening protocols using annual MRI with EUS (n=98) or annual MRI with EUS every 3rd year (n=198) and between IAR screened at intervals of 12â months (n=180) or IAR that decided to be screened at ≥24â months intervals (n=30). CONCLUSIONS: It appears safe to start screening for PDAC in IAR of non-CDKN2a FPC families at the age of 50â years. MRI-based screening supplemented by EUS at baseline and every 3rd year or when changes in MRI occur appears to be efficient.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma , Detección Precoz del Cáncer/métodos , Páncreas , Neoplasias Pancreáticas , Edad de Inicio , Carcinoma/diagnóstico , Carcinoma/epidemiología , Carcinoma/patología , Endosonografía/métodos , Femenino , Alemania/epidemiología , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética/métodos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Clasificación del Tumor , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Páncreas/diagnóstico por imagen , Páncreas/patología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/epidemiología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Centralization of pancreatic surgery has been shown to reduce postoperative mortality. It is unknown whether resection rates and survival have also improved. The aim of this study was to analyse the impact of nationwide centralization of pancreatic surgery on resection rates and long-term survival. METHODS: All patients diagnosed in the Netherlands between 2000 and 2009 with cancer of the pancreatic head were identified in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Changes in referral pattern, resection rates and survival after pancreatoduodenectomy were analysed. Multivariable regression analysis was used to assess the impact of hospital volume (20 or more procedures per year) on survival after resection. RESULTS: Between 2000 and 2009, 11,160 patients were diagnosed with cancer of the pancreatic head. The resection rate increased from 10.7 per cent in 2000-2004 to 15.3 per cent in 2005-2009 (P < 0.001). No significant difference in survival after resection was observed between the two intervals (P = 0.135), although survival was significantly better in high-volume hospitals (median survival 18 months versus 16 months in low/medium-volume hospitals; P = 0.017). After adjustment for patient and tumour characteristics, high hospital volume remained associated with better overall survival after resection (hazard ratio 0.70, 95 per cent confidence interval 0.58 to 0.84; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery led to increased resection rates. High-volume centres had significantly better survival rates. Centralization improves patient outcomes and should be encouraged.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/mortalidad , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Instituciones Oncológicas/organización & administración , Femenino , Hospitales de Alto Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales de Bajo Volumen/estadística & datos numéricos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Derivación y Consulta , Sistema de Registros , Centros Quirúrgicos/organización & administración , Tasa de Supervivencia , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
AIM: Surgery for rectal and sigmoid cancer is a model setting for investigating preoperative information provision and shared decision making (SDM), as the decision consists of a trade-off between the pros and cons of different treatment options. The aim of this study was to explore surgeons' opinion on the preoperative information that should be given to rectal and sigmoid cancer patients and to evaluate what is actually communicated. In addition, we assessed surgeons' attitudes towards SDM and compared these with patient involvement. METHOD: A questionnaire was sent to Dutch surgeons with an interest in gastroenterology. Preoperative consultations were recorded. A checklist was used to code the information that surgeons communicated to the patients. The OPTION-scale was used to measure patient involvement. RESULTS: Questionnaires were sent to 240 surgeons, and 103 (43%) responded. They stated that information on anastomotic leakage and its consequences, the benefits and risks of a defunctioning stoma and the impact of a stoma on quality of life were necessary preoperative information. In practice, patients were inconsistently informed of these items. Most participants agreed to using SDM in their consultations. However, in practice, most patients were offered only one treatment option and little SDM was seen. The mean OPTION-score was low (7/100). CONCLUSION: Insufficient information is given to patients with rectal and sigmoid cancer to guide them on their preferred surgical option. Information should be given on all treatment options, together with their complications and outcome, before any decision is made.
Asunto(s)
Cirugía Colorrectal/métodos , Comunicación , Toma de Decisiones , Participación del Paciente , Periodo Preoperatorio , Neoplasias del Recto/cirugía , Riesgo , Neoplasias del Colon Sigmoide/cirugía , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Fuga Anastomótica , Colostomía , Incontinencia Fecal , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Países Bajos , Relaciones Médico-Paciente , Derivación y Consulta , Estomas Quirúrgicos , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
This retrospective study explores the utility of near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging with indocyanine green (ICG) in enhancing the intraoperative identification and guidance for the resection of abdominal paragangliomas. They can be challenging to detect during minimally invasive surgery, due to their anatomical location, varying size and similar appearance in regard to their surrounding tissue. Patients with suspected abdominal paragangliomas planned for a minimally-invasive resection were included. As part of standard of care they received single intravenous dose of 5 mg ICG after abdominal exploration. NIR fluorescence imaging of the anatomical region of the suspected lesion was performed immediately following intravenous administration, to assess fluorescence signals, intraoperative identification, and histopathological correlation. Out of five resected suspicious lesions, four were imaged with NIR fluorescence, pathology confirming four as paragangliomas, the latter turned out to be an adrenal adenoma. NIR fluorescence identified all four lesions, surpassing the limitations of white-light visualization. Homogeneous fluorescence signals appeared 30-60 s post-ICG administration, which lasted up to 30 min. The study demonstrates the feasibility and potential clinical value of fluorescence-guided minimally-invasive resections of abdominal paragangliomas using a single intravenous ICG dose. These findings support the scientific basis for routine use of ICG-fluorescence-guided surgery in challenging anatomical cases, providing valuable assistance in lesion detection and resection.
Asunto(s)
Verde de Indocianina , Cirugía Asistida por Computador , Humanos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Cirugía Asistida por Computador/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos , Laparotomía , Imagen Óptica/métodosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Intraoperative visualization of pancreatic tumors has the potential to improve radical resection rates. Intraoperative visualization of the common bile duct and bile duct anastomoses could be of added value. In this study, we explored the use of indocyanine green (ICG) for these applications and attempted to optimize injection timing and dose. METHODS: Eight patients undergoing a pancreaticoduodenectomy were injected intravenously with 5 or 10 mg ICG. During and after injection, the pancreas, tumor, common bile duct and surrounding organs were imaged in real time using the Mini-FLARE™ near-infrared (NIR) imaging system. RESULTS: No clear tumor-to-pancreas contrast was observed, except for incidental contrast in 1 patient. The common bile duct was clearly visualized using NIR fluorescence, within 10 min after injection, with a maximal contrast between 30 and 90 min after injection. Patency of biliary anastomoses could be visualized due to biliary excretion of ICG. CONCLUSION: No useful tumor demarcation could be visualized in pancreatic cancer patients after intravenous injection of ICG. However, the common bile duct and biliary anastomoses were clearly visualized during the observation period. Therefore, these imaging strategies could be beneficial during biliary surgery in cases where the surgical anatomy is aberrant or difficult to identify.
Asunto(s)
Diagnóstico por Imagen/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Pancreaticoduodenectomía/métodos , Adulto , Anciano , Anastomosis Quirúrgica , Conducto Colédoco/patología , Conducto Colédoco/cirugía , Femenino , Colorantes Fluorescentes , Humanos , Verde de Indocianina , Rayos Infrarrojos , Periodo Intraoperatorio , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: First, this study aimed to assess the prognostic value of different definitions for resection margin status on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Second, preoperative predictors of direct margin involvement were identified. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This nationwide observational cohort study included all patients who underwent upfront PDAC resection (2014-2016), as registered in the prospective Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Audit. Patients were subdivided into three groups: R0 (≥1 mm margin clearance), R1 (<1 mm margin clearance) or R1 (direct margin involvement). Survival was compared using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Logistic regression with baseline variables was performed to identify preoperative predictors of R1 (direct). RESULTS: 595 patients with a median OS of 18 months (IQR 10-32 months) months were analysed. R0 (≥1 mm) was achieved in 277 patients (47%), R1 (<1 mm) in 146 patients (24%) and R1 (direct) in 172 patients (29%). R1 (direct) was associated with a worse OS, as compared with both R0 (≥1 mm) (hazard ratio (HR) 1.35 [95% and confidence interval (CI) 1.08-1.70); P < 0.01) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.29 [95%CI 1.01-1.67]; P < 0.05). No OS difference was found between R0 (≥1 mm) and R1 (<1 mm) (HR 1.05 [95% CI 0.82-1.34]; P = 0.71). Preoperative predictors associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) included age, male sex, performance score 2-4, and venous or arterial tumour involvement. CONCLUSION: Resection margin clearance of <1 mm, but without direct margin involvement, does not affect survival, as compared with a margin clearance of ≥1 mm. Given that any vascular tumour involvement on preoperative imaging was associated with an increased risk of R1 (direct) resection with upfront surgery, neoadjuvant therapy might be considered in these patients.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/cirugía , Márgenes de Escisión , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/cirugía , Anciano , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patología , Estudios de Cohortes , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Femenino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Análisis Multivariante , Países Bajos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Pronóstico , Modelos de Riesgos Proporcionales , Tasa de SupervivenciaRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapéutico , Biomarcadores de Tumor/metabolismo , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/patología , Procesamiento de Imagen Asistido por Computador/métodos , Cuidados Intraoperatorios , Terapia Neoadyuvante/métodos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/patología , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/diagnóstico por imagen , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/tratamiento farmacológico , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/metabolismo , Femenino , Fluorouracilo/uso terapéutico , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Inmunohistoquímica , Irinotecán/uso terapéutico , Leucovorina/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Oxaliplatino/uso terapéutico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/diagnóstico por imagen , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/tratamiento farmacológico , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/metabolismo , Pronóstico , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Pancreatic cancer has a very poor prognosis. Best practices for the use of chemotherapy, enzyme replacement therapy, and biliary drainage have been identified but their implementation in daily clinical practice is often suboptimal. We hypothesized that a nationwide program to enhance implementation of these best practices in pancreatic cancer care would improve survival and quality of life. METHODS/DESIGN: PACAP-1 is a nationwide multicenter stepped-wedge cluster randomized controlled superiority trial. In a per-center stepwise and randomized manner, best practices in pancreatic cancer care regarding the use of (neo)adjuvant and palliative chemotherapy, pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy, and metal biliary stents are implemented in all 17 Dutch pancreatic centers and their regional referral networks during a 6-week initiation period. Per pancreatic center, one multidisciplinary team functions as reference for the other centers in the network. Key best practices were identified from the literature, 3 years of data from existing nationwide registries within the Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project (PACAP), and national expert meetings. The best practices follow the Dutch guideline on pancreatic cancer and the current state of the literature, and can be executed within daily clinical practice. The implementation process includes monitoring, return visits, and provider feedback in combination with education and reminders. Patient outcomes and compliance are monitored within the PACAP registries. Primary outcome is 1-year overall survival (for all disease stages). Secondary outcomes include quality of life, 3- and 5-year overall survival, and guideline compliance. An improvement of 10% in 1-year overall survival is considered clinically relevant. A 25-month study duration was chosen, which provides 80% statistical power for a mortality reduction of 10.0% in the 17 pancreatic cancer centers, with a required sample size of 2142 patients, corresponding to a 6.6% mortality reduction and 4769 patients nationwide. DISCUSSION: The PACAP-1 trial is designed to evaluate whether a nationwide program for enhanced implementation of best practices in pancreatic cancer care can improve 1-year overall survival and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03513705. Trial opened for accrual on 22th May 2018.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/mortalidad , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/terapia , Implementación de Plan de Salud , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/mortalidad , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/terapia , Calidad de Vida , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos del Sistema Biliar , Carcinoma Ductal Pancreático/epidemiología , Niño , Preescolar , Análisis por Conglomerados , Drenaje , Terapia de Reemplazo Enzimático , Femenino , Humanos , Lactante , Recién Nacido , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Multicéntricos como Asunto , Terapia Neoadyuvante , Países Bajos/epidemiología , Cuidados Paliativos , Neoplasias Pancreáticas/epidemiología , Pancreaticoduodenectomía , Cooperación del Paciente , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Stents , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Patients with SDHD-associated head-and-neck paragangliomas (HNP) are at risk for developing pheochromocytomas for which screening has been advised. To assess clinical, biochemical, and radiological outcomes of screening in a large single-center cohort of SDHD-positive patients with HNP and to address the necessity for repetitive follow-up, we evaluated 93 patients with SDHD-associated HNP (p.Asp92Tyr, p.Leu139Pro). Screening consisted of measurement of 24 h urinary excretion of catecholamines and/or their metabolites in duplicate, which was repeated with intervals of 2 years if initial biochemical screening was negative. In patients, in whom urinary excretion was above the reference limit, imaging studies with (123)I-MIBG (metaiodobenzylguanidine) scintigraphy and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and/or computed tomography (CT) were performed. Pheochromocytomas and extra-adrenal paragangliomas were treated surgically after appropriate blockade. Median follow-up was 4.5 years (range 0.5-19.5 years). Twenty-eight out of the 93 patients were included in our study and underwent additional imaging for pheochromocytomas/extra-adrenal paragangliomas. In 11 out of the 28 patients intra-adrenal pheochromocytomas were found. Extra-adrenal paragangliomas were discovered in eight patients. These tumors were detected during initial screening in 63% of cases, whereas 37% were detected after repeated biochemical screening. One patient was diagnosed with a biochemically silent pheochromocytoma. The high prevalence of pheochromocytomas/extra-adrenal paragangliomas in patients with SDHD-associated HNP warrants regular screening for tumors in these patients. Paragangliomas that do not secrete catecholamines might be more prevalent than previously reported. Future studies will have to establish whether routine imaging studies should be included in the screening of SDHD mutation carriers, irrespective of biochemical screening.