Surveillance for Presumed BD-IPMN of the Pancreas: Stability, Size, and Age Identify Targets for Discontinuation.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Currently, most patients with branch duct intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (BD-IPMN) are offered indefinite surveillance, resulting in health care costs with questionable benefits regarding cancer prevention. This study sought to identify patients in whom the risk of cancer is equivalent to an age-matched population, thereby justifying discontinuation of surveillance. METHODS: International multicenter study involving presumed BD-IPMN without worrisome features (WFs) or high-risk stigmata (HRS) at diagnosis who underwent surveillance. Clusters of individuals at risk for cancer development were defined according to cyst size and stability for at least 5 years, and age-matched controls were used for comparison using standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) for pancreatic cancer. RESULTS: Of 3844 patients with presumed BD-IPMN, 775 (20.2%) developed WFs and 68 (1.8%) HRS after a median surveillance of 53 (interquartile range 53) months. Some 164 patients (4.3%) underwent surgery. Of the overall cohort, 1617 patients (42%) remained stable without developing WFs or HRS for at least 5 years. In patients 75 years or older, the SIR was 1.12 (95% CI, 0.23-3.39), and in patients 65 years or older with stable lesions smaller than 15 mm in diameter after 5 years, the SIR was 0.95 (95% CI, 0.11-3.42). The all-cause mortality for patients who did not develop WFs or HRS for at least 5 years was 4.9% (n = 79), and the disease-specific mortality was 0.3% (n = 5). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of developing pancreatic malignancy in presumed BD-IPMN without WFs or HRS after 5 years of surveillance is comparable to that of the general population depending on cyst size and patient age. Surveillance discontinuation could be justified after 5 years of stability in patients older than 75 years with cysts <30 mm, and in patients 65 years or older who have cysts ≤15 mm.

GATA4 and GATA6 loss-of-expression is associated with extinction of the classical programme and poor outcome in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: GATA6 is a key regulator of the classical phenotype in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Low GATA6 expression associates with poor patient outcome. GATA4 is the second most expressed GATA factor in the pancreas. We assessed whether, and how, GATA4 contributes to PDAC phenotype and analysed the association of expression with outcome and response to chemotherapy. DESIGN: We analysed PDAC transcriptomic data, stratifying cases according to GATA4 and GATA6 expression and identified differentially expressed genes and pathways. The genome-wide distribution of GATA4 was assessed, as well as the effects of GATA4 knockdown. A multicentre tissue microarray study to assess GATA4 and GATA6 expression in samples (n=745) from patients with resectable was performed. GATA4 and GATA6 levels were dichotomised into high/low categorical variables; association with outcome was assessed using univariable and multivariable Cox regression models. RESULTS: GATA4 messenger RNA is enriched in classical, compared with basal-like tumours. We classified samples in 4 groups as high/low for GATA4 and GATA6. Reduced expression of GATA4 had a minor transcriptional impact but low expression of GATA4 enhanced the effects of GATA6 low expression. GATA4 and GATA6 display a partially overlapping genome-wide distribution, mainly at promoters. Reduced expression of both proteins in tumours was associated with the worst patient survival. GATA4 and GATA6 expression significantly decreased in metastases and negatively correlated with basal markers. CONCLUSIONS: GATA4 and GATA6 cooperate to maintain the classical phenotype. Our findings provide compelling rationale to assess their expression as biomarkers of poor prognosis and therapeutic response.

Chemotherapy-induced infiltration of neutrophils promotes pancreatic cancer metastasis via Gas6/AXL signalling axis.

OBJECTIVE: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is a highly metastatic disease and cytotoxic chemotherapy is the standard of care treatment for patients with advanced disease. Here, we investigate how the microenvironment in PDAC liver metastases reacts to chemotherapy and its role in metastatic disease progression post-treatment, an area which is poorly understood. DESIGN: The impact of chemotherapy on metastatic disease progression and immune cell infiltrates was characterised using flow and mass cytometry combined with transcriptional and histopathological analysis in experimental PDAC liver metastases mouse models. Findings were validated in patient derived liver metastases and in an autochthonous PDAC mouse model. Human and murine primary cell cocultures and ex vivo patient-derived liver explants were deployed to gain mechanistical insights on whether and how chemotherapy affects the metastatic tumour microenvironment. RESULTS: We show that in vivo, chemotherapy induces an initial infiltration of proinflammatory macrophages into the liver and activates cytotoxic T cells, leading only to a temporary restraining of metastatic disease progression. However, after stopping treatment, neutrophils are recruited to the metastatic liver via CXCL1 and 2 secretion by metastatic tumour cells. These neutrophils express growth arrest specific 6 (Gas6) which leads to AXL receptor activation on tumour cells enabling their regrowth. Disruption of neutrophil infiltration or inhibition of the Gas6/AXL signalling axis in combination with chemotherapy inhibits metastatic growth. Chemotherapy increases Gas6 expression in circulating neutrophils from patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer and recombinant Gas6 is sufficient to promote tumour cell proliferation ex vivo, in patient-derived metastatic liver explants. CONCLUSION: Combining chemotherapy with Gas6/AXL or neutrophil targeted therapy could provide a therapeutic benefit for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Optimising treatment pathways for borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer: an adaptive personalised approach.

The treatment paradigm for borderline and locally advanced pancreatic cancer is evolving with an increased shift towards utilising systemic chemotherapy and chemoradiation to potentially facilitate more curative resections. This has been driven by the improved outcomes from the use systemic combination chemotherapy on its own, or sequentially with chemoradiation, resulting in improved resection rates and survival outcomes.

Considerations for the treatment of pancreatic cancer during the COVID-19 pandemic: the UK consensus position.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic epicentre has moved to the USA and Europe, where it is placing unprecedented demands on healthcare resources and staff availability. These service constraints, coupled with concerns relating to an increased incidence and severity of COVID-19 among patients with cancer, should lead to re-consideration of the risk-benefit balance for standard treatment pathways. This is of particular importance to pancreatic cancer, given that standard diagnostic modalities such as endoscopy may be restricted, and that disease biology precludes significant delays in treatment. In light of this, we sought consensus from UK clinicians with an interest in pancreatic cancer for management approaches that would minimise patient risk and accommodate for healthcare service restrictions. The outcomes are described here and include recommendations for treatment prioritisation, strategies to bridge to later surgical resection in resectable disease and factors that modify the risk-benefit balance for treatment in the resectable through to the metastatic settings. Priority is given to strategies that limit hospital visits, including through the use of hypofractionated precision radiotherapy and chemoradiotherapy treatment approaches.

The Impact of Positive Resection Margins on Survival and Recurrence Following Resection and Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma.

OBJECTIVE AND BACKGROUND: Local and distant disease recurrence are frequently observed following pancreatic cancer resection, but an improved understanding of resection margin assessment is required to aid tailored therapies. METHODS: Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and margin involvement as well as the effects of individual margin involvement on site of recurrence and overall and recurrence-free survival using individual patient data from the European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer (ESPAC)-3 randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: There were 1151 patients, of whom 505 (43.9%) had an R1 resection. The median and 95% confidence interval (CI) overall survival was 24.9 (22.9-27.2) months for 646 (56.1%) patients with resection margin negative (R0 >1 mm) tumors, 25.4 (21.6-30.4) months for 146 (12.7%) patients with R1<1 mm positive resection margins, and 18.7 (17.2-21.1) months for 359 (31.2%) patients with R1-direct positive margins (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, overall R1-direct tumor margins, poor tumor differentiation, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status ≥1, maximum tumor size, and R1-direct posterior resection margin were all independently significantly associated with reduced overall and recurrence-free survival. Competing risks analysis showed that overall R1-direct positive resection margin status, positive lymph node status, WHO performance status 1, and R1-direct positive superior mesenteric/medial margin resection status were all significantly associated with local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: R1-direct resections were associated with significantly reduced overall and recurrence-free survival following pancreatic cancer resection. Resection margin involvement was also associated with an increased risk for local recurrence.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of metal versus plastic stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections: metal stents are advantageous.

BACKGROUND: The use of fully covered metal stents (FCSEMS) and specifically designed lumen apposing metal stents for transmural drainage of pancreatic fluid collections has become widespread. A systematic review published in 2015 did not support the routine use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections. However, recent studies have shown conflicting data; therefore a systematic review and meta-analysis was performed. METHOD: We conducted a database search for original comparative studies between plastic and metal stents. The random effects model was used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Outcomes analysed were clinical success, adverse events and requirement of further intervention. RESULTS: The search identified 936 studies, 7 studies with 681 (340 metal, 341 plastic) patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. Clinical success was achieved in 93.8% versus 86.2% in the metal and plastic groups, respectively, RR 1.08 [95% CI 1.02-1.14]; p = 0.009. Adverse events were reduced for metal stents when compared with plastic (10.2% vs. 25.0%), RR 0.42 [95% CI 0.22-0.81]; p = 0.010. Metal stent usage reduced bleeding (2.8% vs. 7.9%), RR 0.37; [95% CI 0.18-0.75]; p = 0.006. Further intervention was required in 12.4% of patients in the metal stent group versus 26.7% for plastic stents, RR 0.54; [95% CI 0.22-1.29]; p = 0.165. CONCLUSIONS: The use of metal stents for drainage of pancreatic fluid collections is associated with improved clinical success, fewer adverse events and reduced bleeding compared to plastic stents.

Cytoplasmic HuR Status Predicts Disease-free Survival in Resected Pancreatic Cancer: A Post-hoc Analysis From the International Phase III ESPAC-3 Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: We tested cytoplasmic HuR (cHuR) as a predictive marker for response to chemotherapy by examining tumor samples from the international European Study Group of Pancreatic Cancer-3 trial, in which patients with resected pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDA) received either gemcitabine (GEM) or 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) adjuvant monotherapy. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have implicated the mRNA-binding protein, HuR (ELAVL1), as a predictive marker for PDA treatment response in the adjuvant setting. These studies were, however, based on small cohorts of patients outside of a clinical trial, or a clinical trial in which patients received multimodality therapy with concomitant radiation. METHODS: Tissue samples from 379 patients with PDA enrolled in the European Study Group of Pancreatic Cancer-3 trial were immunolabeled with an anti-HuR antibody and scored for cHuR expression. Patients were dichotomized into groups of high versus low cHuR expression. RESULTS: There was no association between cHuR expression and prognosis in the overall cohort [disease-free survival (DFS), P = 0.44; overall survival, P = 0.41). Median DFS for patients with high cHuR was significantly greater for patients treated with 5-FU compared to GEM [20.1 months, confidence interval (CI): 8.3-36.4 vs 10.9 months, CI: 7.5-14.2; P = 0.04]. Median DFS was similar between the treatment arms in patients with low cHuR (5-FU, 12.8 months, CI: 10.6-14.6 vs GEM, 12.9 months, CI: 11.2-15.4). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with high cHuR-expressing tumors may benefit from 5-FU-based adjuvant therapy as compared to GEM, whereas those patients with low cHuR appear to have no survival advantage with GEM compared with 5-FU. Further studies are needed to validate HuR as a biomarker in both future monotherapy and multiagent regimens.

Comparison of adjuvant gemcitabine and capecitabine with gemcitabine monotherapy in patients with resected pancreatic cancer (ESPAC-4): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The ESPAC-3 trial showed that adjuvant gemcitabine is the standard of care based on similar survival to and less toxicity than adjuvant 5-fluorouracil/folinic acid in patients with resected pancreatic cancer. Other clinical trials have shown better survival and tumour response with gemcitabine and capecitabine than with gemcitabine alone in advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. We aimed to determine the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine and capecitabine compared with gemcitabine monotherapy for resected pancreatic cancer. METHODS: We did a phase 3, two-group, open-label, multicentre, randomised clinical trial at 92 hospitals in England, Scotland, Wales, Germany, France, and Sweden. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had undergone complete macroscopic resection for ductal adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (R0 or R1 resection). We randomly assigned patients (1:1) within 12 weeks of surgery to receive six cycles of either 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone administered once a week for three of every 4 weeks (one cycle) or with 1660 mg/m2 oral capecitabine administered for 21 days followed by 7 days' rest (one cycle). Randomisation was based on a minimisation routine, and country was used as a stratification factor. The primary endpoint was overall survival, measured as the time from randomisation until death from any cause, and assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Toxicity was analysed in all patients who received trial treatment. This trial was registered with the EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Of 732 patients enrolled, 730 were included in the final analysis. Of these, 366 were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine and 364 to gemcitabine plus capecitabine. The Independent Data and Safety Monitoring Committee requested reporting of the results after there were 458 (95%) of a target of 480 deaths. The median overall survival for patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group was 28·0 months (95% CI 23·5-31·5) compared with 25·5 months (22·7-27·9) in the gemcitabine group (hazard ratio 0·82 [95% CI 0·68-0·98], p=0·032). 608 grade 3-4 adverse events were reported by 226 of 359 patients in the gemcitabine plus capecitabine group compared with 481 grade 3-4 adverse events in 196 of 366 patients in the gemcitabine group. INTERPRETATION: The adjuvant combination of gemcitabine and capecitabine should be the new standard of care following resection for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

The diagnostic value of Rosemont and Japanese diagnostic criteria for 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible' and 'early' chronic pancreatitis.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal data are lacking to support consensus criteria for diagnosing early chronic pancreatitis. METHODS: Retrospective single centre study of the initial evidence for chronic pancreatitis (CP), with reassessment after follow-up (January 2003-November 2016). RESULTS: 807 patients were previously diagnosed with chronic pancreatitis. This diagnosis was rejected in 118 patients: 52 had another pathology altogether, the remaining 66 patients formed the study population. 38 patients with 'normal' imaging were reclassified as chronic abdominal pain syndrome (CAPS), and 28 patients had minimal change features of CP on EUS (MCEUS) but never progressed. Strict application of the Japanese diagnostic criteria would diagnose only two patients with early CP and eleven as possible CP. Patients were more likely to have MCEUS if the EUS was performed within 12 months of an attack of acute pancreatitis. 40 patients with MCEUS were identified, including an additional 12 who progressed to definite CP after a median of 30 (18.75-36.5) months. Those continuing to consume excess alcohol and/or continued smoking were significantly more likely to progress. Those who progressed were more likely to develop pancreatic exocrine insufficiency, require pancreatic surgery and had higher mortality. CONCLUSION: There needs to be more stringent application of the systems used for diagnosing chronic pancreatitis with revision of the current terminology 'indeterminate', 'suggestive', 'possible', and 'early' chronic pancreatitis. All patients with MCEUS features of CP require ongoing clinical follow up of at least 30 months and all patients with these features should be strongly counselled regarding smoking cessation and abstinence from alcohol.

GATA6 regulates EMT and tumour dissemination, and is a marker of response to adjuvant chemotherapy in pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The role of GATA factors in cancer has gained increasing attention recently, but the function of GATA6 in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is controversial. GATA6 is amplified in a subset of tumours and was proposed to be oncogenic, but high GATA6 levels are found in well-differentiated tumours and are associated with better patient outcome. By contrast, a tumour-suppressive function of GATA6 was demonstrated using genetic mouse models. We aimed at clarifying GATA6 function in PDAC. DESIGN: We combined GATA6 silencing and overexpression in PDAC cell lines with GATA6 ChIP-Seq and RNA-Seq data, in order to understand the mechanism of GATA6 functions. We then confirmed some of our observations in primary patient samples, some of which were included in the ESPAC-3 randomised clinical trial for adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: GATA6 inhibits the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT) in vitro and cell dissemination in vivo. GATA6 has a unique proepithelial and antimesenchymal function, and its transcriptional regulation is direct and implies, indirectly, the regulation of other transcription factors involved in EMT. GATA6 is lost in tumours, in association with altered differentiation and the acquisition of a basal-like molecular phenotype, consistent with an epithelial-to-epithelial (ET2) transition. Patients with basal-like GATA6low tumours have a shorter survival and have a distinctly poor response to adjuvant 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin. However, modulation of GATA6 expression in cultured cells does not directly regulate response to 5-FU. CONCLUSIONS: We provide mechanistic insight into GATA6 tumour-suppressive function, its role as a regulator of canonical epithelial differentiation, and propose that loss of GATA6 expression is both prognostic and predictive of response to adjuvant therapy.

Vandetanib plus gemcitabine versus placebo plus gemcitabine in locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic carcinoma (ViP): a prospective, randomised, double-blind, multicentre phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Erlotinib is an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has shown a significant but only marginally improved median overall survival when combined with gemcitabine in patients with locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer. Vandetanib is a novel tyrosine kinase inhibitor of VEGFR2, RET, and EGFR, all of which are in involved in the pathogenesis of pancreatic cancer. We investigated the clinical efficacy of vandetanib when used in combination with gemcitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The Vandetanib in Pancreatic Cancer (ViP) trial was a phase 2 double-blind, multicentre, randomised placebo-controlled trial in previously untreated adult patients (aged ≥18 years) diagnosed with locally advanced or metastatic carcinoma of the pancreas confirmed by cytology or histology. Patients had to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) score of 0-2 and a documented life expectancy of at least 3 months. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive vandetanib plus gemcitabine (vandetanib group) or placebo plus gemcitabine (placebo group) according to pre-generated sequences produced on the principle of randomly permuted blocks with variable block sizes of two and four. Patients were stratified at randomisation by disease stage and ECOG performance status. All patients received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 as a 30-min intravenous infusion, weekly, for 7 weeks followed by a 1-week break, followed by a cycle of 3 weeks of treatment with a 1-week break, until disease progression, and either oral vandetanib 300 mg per day once daily or matching placebo. Patients and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome measure was overall survival (defined as the difference in time between randomisation and death from any cause or the censor date) in the intention-to-treat population. This trial has been completed and the final results are reported. The study is registered at EudraCT, number 2007-004299-38, and ISRCTN, number ISRCTN96397434. FINDINGS: Patients were screened and enrolled between Oct 24, 2011, and Oct 7, 2013. Of 381 patients screened, 142 eligible patients were randomly assigned to treatment (72 to the vandetanib group and 70 to the placebo group). At database lock on July 15, 2015, at a median follow-up of 24·9 months (IQR 24·3 to not attainable), 131 patients had died: 70 (97%) of 72 in the vandetanib group and 61 (87%) of 70 in the placebo group. The median overall survival was 8·83 months (95% CI 7·11-11·58) in the vandetanib group and 8·95 months (6·55-11·74) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 1·21, 80·8% CI 0·95-1·53; log rank χ21df 1·1, p=0·303). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (35 [49%] of 72 patients in the vandetanib group vs 22 [31%] of 70 in the placebo group), thrombocytopenia (20 [28%] vs 16 [23%]), hypertension (nine [13%] vs 11 [16%]), leucopenia (12 [17%] vs 13 [19%]), and fatigue (17 [24%] vs 15 [21%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred during the study. INTERPRETATION: The addition of vandetanib to gemcitabine monotherapy did not improve overall survival in advanced pancreatic cancer. Tyrosine kinase inhibitors might still have potential in the treatment of pancreatic cancer but further development requires the identification of biomarkers to specifically identify responsive cancer subtypes. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca.

Sample size re-estimation in paired comparative diagnostic accuracy studies with a binary response.

BACKGROUND: The sample size required to power a study to a nominal level in a paired comparative diagnostic accuracy study, i.e. studies in which the diagnostic accuracy of two testing procedures is compared relative to a gold standard, depends on the conditional dependence between the two tests - the lower the dependence the greater the sample size required. A priori, we usually do not know the dependence between the two tests and thus cannot determine the exact sample size required. One option is to use the implied sample size for the maximal negative dependence, giving the largest possible sample size. However, this is potentially wasteful of resources and unnecessarily burdensome on study participants as the study is likely to be overpowered. A more accurate estimate of the sample size can be determined at a planned interim analysis point where the sample size is re-estimated. METHODS: This paper discusses a sample size estimation and re-estimation method based on the maximum likelihood estimates, under an implied multinomial model, of the observed values of conditional dependence between the two tests and, if required, prevalence, at a planned interim. The method is illustrated by comparing the accuracy of two procedures for the detection of pancreatic cancer, one procedure using the standard battery of tests, and the other using the standard battery with the addition of a PET/CT scan all relative to the gold standard of a cell biopsy. Simulation of the proposed method illustrates its robustness under various conditions. RESULTS: The results show that the type I error rate of the overall experiment is stable using our suggested method and that the type II error rate is close to or above nominal. Furthermore, the instances in which the type II error rate is above nominal are in the situations where the lowest sample size is required, meaning a lower impact on the actual number of participants recruited. CONCLUSION: We recommend multinomial model maximum likelihood estimation of the conditional dependence between paired diagnostic accuracy tests at an interim to reduce the number of participants required to power the study to at least the nominal level. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN ISRCTN73852054 . Registered 9th of January 2015. Retrospectively registered.

Association of genetic polymorphisms with survival of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma patients.

Germline genetic variability might contribute, at least partially, to the survival of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) patients. Two recently performed genome-wide association studies (GWAS) on PDAC overall survival (OS) suggested (P < 10(-5)) the association between 30 genomic regions and PDAC OS. With the aim to highlight the true associations within these regions, we analyzed 44 single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the 30 candidate regions in 1722 PDAC patients within the PANcreatic Disease ReseArch (PANDoRA) consortium. We observed statistically significant associations for five of the selected regions. One association in the CTNNA2 gene on chromosome 2p12 [rs1567532, hazard ratio (HR) = 1.75, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.19-2.58, P = 0.005 for homozygotes for the minor allele] and one in the last intron of the RUNX2 gene on chromosome 6p21 (rs12209785, HR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.80-0.98, P = 0.014 for heterozygotes) are of particular relevance. These loci do not coincide with those that showed the strongest associations in the previous GWAS. In silico analysis strongly suggested a possible mechanistic link between these two SNPs and pancreatic cancer survival. Functional studies are warranted to confirm the link between these genes (or other genes mapping in those regions) and PDAC prognosis in order to understand whether these variants may have the potential to impact treatment decisions and design of clinical trials.

Immunobiological effects of gemcitabine and capecitabine combination chemotherapy in advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies suggest that chemotherapy may enhance the immune response against pancreatic cancer. METHODS: The levels of granulocyte macrophage-colony-stimulating factor (GM-CSF) and interleukin-6 (IL-6) and the associated inflammatory marker C-reactive protein (CRP) were assessed in 38 patients receiving gemcitabine and capecitabine combination chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer within the TeloVac trial. Apoptosis (M30) and total immune response (delayed-type hypersensitivity and/or T-cell response) were also assessed and levels of apoptosis induction correlated with immune response. The telomerase GV1001 vaccine was given either sequentially (n=18) or concomitantly (n=24) with the combination chemotherapy. RESULTS: There were no differences between baseline and post-treatment levels of CRP (P=0.19), IL-6 (P=0.19) and GM-CSF (P=0.71). There was a positive correlation between post-chemotherapy CRP and IL-6 levels (r=0.45, P=0.005) and between CRP with carbohydrate antigen-19-9 (CA19-9) levels at baseline (r=0.45, P=0.015) and post treatment (r=0.40, P=0.015). The change in CRP and IL-6 levels was positively correlated (r=0.40, P=0.012). Hazard ratios (95% CI) for baseline CA19-9 (1.30 (1.07-1.59), P=0.009) and CRP (1.55 (1.00-2.39), P=0.049) levels were each independently predictive of survival. The M30 mean matched differences between pre- and post-chemotherapy showed evidence of apoptosis in both the sequential (P=0.058) and concurrent (P=0.0018) chemoimmunotherapy arms. Respectively, 5 of 10 and 9 of 20 patients had a positive immune response but there was no association with apoptosis. CONCLUSIONS: Combination gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy did not affect circulating levels of GM-CSF, IL-6 and CRP. Chemotherapy-induced apoptosis was not associated with the immunogenicity induced by the GV1001 vaccine in advanced pancreatic cancer.

The impact of diabetes mellitus on survival following resection and adjuvant chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is frequently observed in pancreatic cancer patients and is both a risk factor and an early manifestation of the disease. METHODS: We analysed the prognostic impact of diabetes on the outcome of pancreatic cancer following resection and adjuvant chemotherapy using individual patient data from three European Study Group for Pancreatic Cancer randomised controlled trials. Analyses were carried out to assess the association between clinical characteristics and the presence of preoperative diabetes, as well as the effect of diabetic status on overall survival. RESULTS: In total, 1105 patients were included in the analysis, of whom 257 (23%) had confirmed diabetes and 848 (77%) did not. Median (95% confidence interval (CI)) unadjusted overall survival in non-diabetic patients was 22.3 (20.8-24.1) months compared with 18.8 (16.9-22.1) months for diabetic patients (P=0.24). Diabetic patients were older, had increased weight and more co-morbidities. Following adjustment, multivariable analysis demonstrated that diabetic patients had an increased risk of death (hazard ratio: 1.19 (95% CI 1.01, 1.40), P=0.034). Maximum tumour size of diabetic patients was larger at randomisation (33.6 vs 29.7 mm, P=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes mellitus was associated with increased tumour size and reduced survival following pancreatic cancer resection and adjuvant chemotherapy.

Outcomes From Minimal Access Retroperitoneal and Open Pancreatic Necrosectomy in 394 Patients With Necrotizing Pancreatitis.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the outcomes from minimal access retroperitoneal pancreatic necrosectomy (MARPN) and open pancreatic necrosectomy (OPN) for severe necrotizing pancreatitis in a single center. BACKGROUND: The optimal management of severe pancreatic necrosis is evolving with a few large center single series. METHODS: Between 1997 and 2013, patients with necrotizing pancreatitis at the Liverpool Pancreas Center were reviewed. Outcome measures were retrospectively analyzed by intention to treat. RESULTS: There were 394 patients who had either MARPN (274, 69.5%) or OPN (120, 30.5%). Complications occurred in 174 MARPN patients (63.5%) and 98 (81.7%) OPN patients (P < 0.001). OPN was associated with increased postoperative multiorgan failure [42 (35%) vs 56 (20.4%), P = 0.001] and median (inter-quartile range) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score 9 (6-11.5) vs 8 (5-11), P < 0.001] with intensive care required less frequently in MARPN patients [40.9% (112) vs 75% (90), P < 0.001]. The mortality rate was 42 (15.3%) in MARPNs and 28 (23.3%) in OPNs (P = 0.064). Both the mortality and the overall complication rates decreased between 1997-2008 and 2008-2013 [49 (23.8%) vs 21 (11.2%) P = 0.001, respectively; and 151 (73.3%) vs 121 (64.4%), P = 0.080, respectively). Increased mortality was independently associated with age (P < 0.001), preoperative intensive care stay (P = 0.014), and multiple organ failure (P < 0.001); operation before 2008 (P < 0.001) and conversion to OPN (P = 0.035). MARPN independently reduced mortality odds risk (odds ratio = 0.27; 95% confidence interval = 0.12-0.57; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Increasing experience and advances in perioperative care have led to improvement in outcomes. The role of MARPN in reducing complications and deaths within a multimodality approach remains substantial and should be used initially if feasible.

Management and Outcome of 64 Patients with Pancreatic Serous Cystic Neoplasms.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management approach to pancreatic serous cystic neoplasms (SCNs) is still evolving. METHODS: Consecutive patients with SCN managed at the Liverpool Pancreas Cancer Centre between 2000 and 2013 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: There were 64 patients consisting of 39 women (60.9%) and 25 men (39.1%). Forty-seven patients (73.4%) had surgical removal and 17 (26.6%) were observed. The possibility of a non-SCN malignancy was the predominant indication for resection in 27 (57.4%) patients. Postoperative morbidity occurred in 26 (55.3%) patients with 2 (4.3%) deaths. An increased risk of resection was associated with patient's age (p = 0.011), diagnosis before 2009 (p < 0.001), pain (p = 0.043), possibility of cancer (p = 0.009) and a solid SCN component on imaging (p = 0.002). Independent factors associated with resection were a diagnosis before 2009 (p = 0.005) and a solid SCN component (p < 0.001). Independent factors associated with shorter time to surgical resection were persistent pain (p = 0.003) and a solid SCN component (p = 0.007). CONCLUSION: There was a reduction in the proportion of resections with the application of an observe-only policy for asymptomatic patients with more definite features of SCN. Improved criteria are still required in the remainder of patients with uncertain features of SCN in deciding for intervention or surveillance.