CA19-9 Response to First-Line Neoadjuvant FOLFIRINOX and Second-Line Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel for Patients with Operable Pancreatic Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Response to second-line (2L) neoadjuvant therapy for operable pancreatic cancer (PC) is understudied. This study examined carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) response to first-line (1L) and 2L chemotherapy. METHODS: The study identified patients with operable PC and elevated CA19-9 (≥ 35 U/mL with total bilirubin < 2 mg/dL) who received 1L FOLFIRINOX (FFX). The patients were restaged after 2 months and based on response, received additional FFX or gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GnP) as part of total neoadjuvant therapy. Response was defined as a decrease in tumor size on computed tomography (CT) imaging or a decline in CA19-9 of 50% or more and preserved performance status. RESULTS: For operable PC with an elevated CA19-9, 108 patients received 1L FFX. After 2 months of chemotherapy, the decision was made to continue FFX (FFX ≥ FFX) for 76 (70%) of the 108 patients and switch to GnP (FFX ≥ GnP)) for 32 (30%) of the patients. Of the 32 FFX ≥ GnP patients, 27 had no evidence of radiographic or biochemical (CA19-9) response to 1L FFX. Of these 27 patients, 26 (96%) demonstrated a response to 2L GnP. After 4 months of chemotherapy, 62 (82%) of the 76 FFX ≥ FFX patients had a CA19-9 response compared with 31 (97%) of the 32 FFX ≥ GnP patients (p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of biochemical response to 2 months of 1L FFX may identify a subgroup of patients with a very high rate of response to 2L GnP, emphasizing the importance of assessing treatment response at 2-month intervals.

Comparison of Conventional Gadoxetate Disodium-Enhanced MRI Features and Radiomics Signatures With Machine Learning for Diagnosing Microvascular Invasion.

OBJECTIVE. This study aimed to determine the best model for predicting microvascular invasion (MVI) of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) using conventional gadolinium-ethoxybenzyl-diethylenetriamine pentaacetic acid (gadoxetate disodium)-enhanced MRI features and radiomics signatures with machine learning. MATERIALS AND METHODS. This retrospective study included 269 patients with a postoperative pathologic diagnosis of HCC. Gadoxetate disodium-enhanced MRI features were assessed, including T1 relaxation time, tumor margin, tumor size, peritumoral enhancement, peritumoral hypointensity, and ADC. Radiomics models were constructed and validated by machine learning. The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) was used for feature selection, and radiomics-based LASSO models were constructed with six classifiers. Predictive capability was assessed using the ROC AUC. RESULTS. Histologic examination confirmed MVI in 111 (41.3%) of the 269 patients. ADC value, nonsmooth tumor margin, and 20-minute T1 relaxation time showed diagnostic accuracy with AUC values of 0.850, 0.847, and 0.846, respectively (p < .05 for all). A total of 1395 quantitative imaging features were extracted. In the hepatobiliary phase (HBP) model, the support vector machine (SVM), extreme gradient boosting (XGBoost), and logistic regression (LR) classifiers showed greater diagnostic efficiency for predicting MVI, with AUCs of 0.942, 0.938, and 0.936, respectively (p < .05 for all). CONCLUSION. ADC value, nonsmooth tumor margin, and 20-minute T1 relaxation time show high diagnostic accuracy for predicting MVI. Radiomics signatures with machine learning can further improve the ability to predict MVI and are best modeled during HBP. The SVM, XGBoost, and LR classifiers may serve as potential biomarkers to evaluate MVI.

Pancreas transplant imaging: how I do it.

Pancreas transplantation aims to restore physiologic normoglycemia in diabetic patients with glomerulopathy and avoid or delay the onset of diabetic retinopathy and arteriopathy. Simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant is the most common approach, using a cadaveric pancreas donation in conjunction with either cadaveric or live donor renal transplant. Alternative techniques include pancreas after kidney transplant, in which the pancreas transplant is performed some years after renal transplant. Pancreas transplant alone is utilized rarely in diabetic patients with compensated renal function. Pancreas grafts have vascular and enteric connections that vary in their anatomic approach, and understanding of this is critical for imaging with ultrasonography, computed tomography, or magnetic resonance imaging. Imaging techniques are directed to display the pancreatic transplant arterial and venous vasculature, parenchyma, and intestinal drainage pathway. Critical vascular information includes venous thrombosis (partial or complete), arterial occlusion, or aneurysm. Parenchymal abnormalities are nonspecific and occur in pancreatitis, graft rejection, and subsequent graft ischemia. Peripancreatic fluid collections include hematoma/seroma, pseudocyst, and abscess. The latter two are related to pancreatitis, duct disruption, or leak from the duodenojejunostomy. An understanding of transplant anatomy and complications will lead to appropriate use of imaging techniques to diagnose or exclude important complications.

Staging chest computed tomography and positron emission tomography in patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma: utility or futility?

OBJECTIVES: This study was conducted to determine if routine staging chest computed tomography (CT) or positron emission tomography (PET) scanning alters the clinical management of patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic adenocarcinoma. METHODS: All new pancreas cancers seen in medical oncology, radiation oncology and surgery from 1 June 2008 to 20 June 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with metastatic disease on chest CT or PET, that had been unsuspected on initial imaging, were identified. RESULTS: Pancreatic adenocarcinoma was present in 247 consecutive patients. Abdominal CT demonstrated metastases in 108 (44%) and localized disease in 139 (56%) patients. Chest CT and PET were not performed in 15 (11%) of these 139 patients. In the remaining 124 patients, CT imaging suggested resectable disease in 46, borderline resectable disease in 52 and locally advanced disease in 26 patients. Chest CT demonstrated an unsuspected lymphoma in one patient with borderline resectable disease and PET identified extrapancreatic disease in two patients with locally advanced disease. Chest CT and PET added no information in 121 (98%) of the 124 patients. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of chest CT and PET to high-quality abdominal CT is of little clinical utility; additional sites of metastasis are rarely found. As the quality of abdominal imaging declines, the yield from other imaging modalities will increase. Dedicated pancreas-specific abdominal CT remains the cornerstone of initial staging in suspected or biopsy-proven pancreatic cancer.

Critical steps for pancreaticoduodenectomy in the setting of pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Pancreatic resection is one part of a multimodal, multidisciplinary approach to current treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The operation herein has been divided into six discreet steps followed by methods of reconstruction. Management of portal venous and arterial involvement is discussed in detail. The key steps to safe pancreatic surgery are emphasized as one part of present and future pancreatic cancer care.

Postoperative surveillance of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) recurrence: practice pattern on standardized imaging and reporting from the society of abdominal radiology disease focus panel on PDAC.

PURPOSE: Surgical resection is the only potential curative treatment for patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but unfortunately most patients recur within 5 years of surgery. This article aims to assess the practice patterns across major academic institutions and develop consensus recommendations for postoperative imaging and interpretation in patients with PDAC. METHODS: The consensus recommendations for postoperative imaging surveillance following PDAC resection were developed using the Delphi method. Members of the Society of Abdominal Radiology (SAR) PDAC Disease Focused Panel (DFP) underwent three rounds of surveys followed by live webinar group discussions to develop consensus recommendations. RESULTS: Significant variations currently exist in the postoperative surveillance of PDAC, even among academic institutions. Differentiating common postoperative inflammatory and fibrotic changes from tumor recurrence remains a diagnostic challenge, and there is no reliable size threshold or growth rate of imaging findings that can provide differentiation. A new liver lesion or peritoneal nodule should be considered suspicious for tumor recurrence, and the imaging features should be interpreted in the appropriate clinical context (e.g., CA 19-9, clinical presentation, pathologic staging). CONCLUSION: Postoperative imaging following PDAC resection is challenging to interpret due to the presence of confounding postoperative inflammatory changes. A standardized reporting template for locoregional findings and report impression may improve communication of relaying risk of recurrence with referring providers, which merits validation in future studies.

Multimodality Imaging for the Staging of Pancreatic Cancer.

Imaging plays a key role in the diagnosis, staging, and follow-up of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. The pancreatic protocol dual-phase multidetector computed tomography scan is the imaging modality of choice. A computed tomography scan is highly accurate for pancreatic tumor detection, assessment of resectability, and detection of metastatic disease. This article reviews key principles of the acquisition, interpretation, and reporting of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma imaging with computed tomography scanning and highlights potential roles for newer and supplemental imaging technologies. We discuss the importance of structured interpretation and reporting for providing the most complete and accurate assessment of tumor stage and resectability.

Structured Reporting in Ultrasound.

Structured reporting of ultrasound examinations can add value throughout the imaging chain. Reports may be created in a more efficient manner, with increased accuracy and clarity. Communication with referring providers and patients may be improved. Patient care can be enhanced through improved adherence with guidelines and local best practices. Radiology departments may benefit from improved billing and quality reporting. Consistent discrete data can enable research and collaborations between institutions. This article will review the multifaceted impact of structuring ultrasound reports.

White paper on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from society of abdominal radiology's disease-focused panel for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Part I, AJCC staging system, NCCN guidelines, and borderline resectable disease.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive gastrointestinal malignancy with a poor 5-year survival rate. Accurate staging of PDAC is an important initial step in the development of a stage-specific treatment plan. Different staging systems/consensus statements convened by different societies and academic practices are currently used. The most recent version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor/node/metastases (TNM) staging system for PDAC has shifted its focus from guiding management to assessing prognosis. In order to preoperatively define the resectability of PDAC and to guide management, additional classification systems have been developed. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, one of the most commonly used systems, provide recommendations on the management and the determination of resectability for PDAC. The NCCN divides PDAC into three categories of resectability based on tumor-vessel relationship: 'resectable,' 'borderline resectable,' and 'unresectable'. Among these, the borderline disease category is of special interest given its evolution over time and the resulting variations in the definition and the associated recommendations for management between different societies. It is important to be familiar with the evolving criteria, and treatment and follow-up recommendations for PDAC. In this article, the most current AJCC staging (8th edition), NCCN guidelines (version 2.2019-April 9, 2019), and challenges and controversies in borderline resectable PDAC are reviewed.

White paper on pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma from society of abdominal radiology's disease-focused panel for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma: Part II, update on imaging techniques and screening of pancreatic cancer in high-risk individuals.

Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive gastrointestinal malignancy with a poor 5-year survival rate. Its high mortality rate is attributed to its aggressive biology and frequently late presentation. While surgical resection remains the only potentially curative treatment, only 10-20% of patients will present with surgically resectable disease. Over the past several years, development of vascular bypass graft techniques and introduction of neoadjuvant treatment regimens have increased the number of patients who can undergo resection with a curative intent. While the role of conventional imaging in the detection, characterization, and staging of patients with PDAC is well established, its role in monitoring treatment response, particularly following neoadjuvant therapy remains challenging because of the complex anatomic and histological nature of PDAC. Novel morphologic and functional imaging techniques (such as DECT, DW-MRI, and PET/MRI) are being investigated to improve the diagnostic accuracy and the ability to measure response to therapy. There is also a growing interest to detect PDAC and its precursor lesions at an early stage in asymptomatic patients to increase the likelihood of achieving cure. This has led to the development of pancreatic cancer screening programs. This article will review recent updates in imaging techniques and the current status of screening and surveillance of individuals at a high risk of developing PDAC.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma: cross-sectional imaging techniques.

Pancreatic adenocarcinoma is a common malignancy that has a poor prognosis. Imaging is vital in its detection, staging, and management. Although a variety of imaging techniques are available, MDCT is the preferred imaging modality for staging and assessing the resectability of pancreatic adenocarcinoma. MR also has an important adjunct role, and may be used in addition to CT or as a problem-solving tool. A dedicated pancreatic protocol should be acquired as a biphasic technique optimized for the detection of pancreatic adenocarcinoma and to allow accurate local and distant disease staging. Emerging techniques like dual-energy CT and texture analysis of CT and MR images have a great potential in improving lesion detection, characterization, and treatment monitoring.

Characterizing indeterminate liver lesions in patients with localized pancreatic cancer at the time of diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: In patients with newly diagnosed pancreatic cancer, the classification of indeterminate liver lesions is an unanswered clinical dilemma as misclassification of these lesions can impact the assignment of clinical stage and subsequent treatment planning. Our objective was to design a standardized classification system to more accurately define the risk of malignancy in indeterminate liver lesions. METHODS: In this retrospective study, patients with localized, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer were identified and pre-treatment computed tomography (CT) scans were evaluated for the presence or absence of liver lesions. Liver lesions were defined as definitely benign (1) or indeterminate (2). Indeterminate lesions were further sub-classified as either indeterminate probably benign (2B) or indeterminate possibly malignant (2M). The index liver lesion was evaluated on follow-up imaging for stability or unequivocal disease progression. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2015, 304 patients with localized, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer were identified and 125 (41%) patients had liver lesions. Of the 125 patients, the liver lesions in 35 (28%) were classified as definitely benign and in 90 (72%) patients they were classified as indeterminate. The 90 patients with indeterminate lesions included 80 (89%) classified as indeterminate probably benign (2B) and 10 (11%) classified as indeterminate possibly malignant (2M). After a median follow-up of 56 weeks, no patient with a definitely benign lesion had metastatic disease progression of the index lesion. Of the 90 patients with indeterminate liver lesions, the index lesion progressed to unequivocal liver metastasis in 8 (9%) patients; 5 (6%) of the 80 lesions classified as indeterminate probably benign (2B), and 3 (30%) of the ten lesions classified as indeterminate possibly malignant (2M). The sensitivity of the classification system was 38% and the specificity was 91%. The positive predictive value was 30% and the negative predictive value was 94%. CONCLUSIONS: A significant proportion of patients with localized pancreatic cancer will have liver lesions identified at the time of diagnosis and most of these lesions will have indeterminate characteristics. A classification system which further stratifies indeterminate liver lesions by malignant potential can assist clinicians in determining optimal treatment plan and is associated with a high negative predictive value.

Survival of patients with resectable pancreatic cancer who received neoadjuvant therapy.

BACKGROUND: Enthusiasm for neoadjuvant therapy is growing from the emerging consensus that pancreatic cancer is a systemic disease at the time of diagnosis. Those who remain in favor of upfront surgery often cite the lack of reported data to support alternative treatment sequencing. We therefore report the results of all patients treated outside of a clinical trial under the direction of a multidisciplinary pancreatic cancer working group. METHODS: We reviewed all patients with resectable pancreatic cancer treated with neoadjuvant therapy (NeoTx) from 2009 to 2013; we excluded those patients treated on prospective clinical trials as they will be the subject of subsequent reports. Data regarding demographics, NeoTx, operative outcomes, pathology, and survival data were abstracted from a prospective database. RESULTS: NeoTx was initiated in 69 patients; median age was 65 years (interquartile range [IQR]: 11) and median carbohydrate antigen 19-9 at diagnosis was 96.5 (IQR 210). NeoTx consisted of chemotherapy alone (n = 10, 14%), chemotherapy and radiation (chemoradiation, n = 53, 77%), or both (n = 6, 9%). Median carbohydrate antigen 19-9 after NeoTx was 39 (IQR 104) corresponding to a median decrease of 60%. Operative resection was completed in 60 (87%) of the 69 patients. At restaging after NeoTx, 5 (7%) of 69 patients were not considered candidates for surgery because of the development of metastatic disease (n = 4) or an inadequate performance status (n = 1). At the time of surgery, 4 (6%) of 64 patients had metastatic disease found at laparoscopy. Of the 60 patients who underwent surgical resection, a complete pathologic response was observed in 2 (3%) patients; 20 (33%) had positive lymph nodes, and the median number of positive lymph nodes was 2 (IQR 3). R0 resections were achieved in 58 (97%) of the 60 patients. Additional postoperative adjuvant therapy was administered to 37 (62%) of the 60 patients. Median survival of all 69 patients was 31.5 months; 44.9 months for the 60 patients who completed all NeoTx and resection compared with 8.1 months for the 9 patients who were not resected (log rank P < .001). CONCLUSION: NeoTx for resectable pancreatic cancer was associated with a median overall survival of 32 months; something not reported for patients treated with surgery first if based on intent-to-treat analysis. Treatment sequencing may provide an oncologic benefit beyond that of the selection bias afforded surgery after a period of induction therapy.