Prediction of Isolated Local Recurrence After Resection of Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma: A Nationwide Study.

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.

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

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

Alternative Randomized Trial Designs in Surgery: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) yield the highest level of evidence but are notoriously difficult to perform in surgery. Surgical RCTs may be hampered by slow accrual, the surgical learning curve, and lack of financial support. Alternative RCT designs such as stepped-wedge randomized controlled trials (SW-RCTs), registry-based randomized controlled trials (RB-RCTs), and trials-within-cohorts (TwiCs) may overcome several of these difficulties. This review provides an overview of alternative RCT designs used in surgical research. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central for surgical SW-RCTs, RB-RCTs, and TwiCs. A surgical RCT was defined as a randomized trial that studied interventions in patients undergoing general surgery, regardless of the affiliation of the corresponding author. Exponential regression analysis was performed to assess time trends. RESULTS: Overall, 41 surgical RCTs using alternative designs were identified, including 17 published final RCT reports and 24 published protocols of ongoing RCTs. These included 25 SW-RCTs (61%), 13 RB-RCTs (32%), and 3 TwiCs (7%). Most of these RCTs were performed in Europe (63%) and within gastrointestinal/oncological surgery (41%). The total number of RCTs using alternative designs exponentially increased over the last 7 years ( P <0.01), with 95% (n=39/41) of the total number published within this time frame. The most reported reasons for using alternative RCT designs were avoidance of contamination for SW-RCTs and generalizability of the trial population for RB-RCTs and TwiCs. CONCLUSIONS: Alternative RCT designs are increasingly used in surgical research, mostly in Europe and within gastrointestinal/oncological surgery. When adequately used, these alternative designs may overcome several difficulties associated with surgical RCTs.

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

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

Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency following pancreatoduodenectomy: A prospective bi-center study.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) is a common complication following pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) leading to malnutrition. The course of PEI and related symptoms and vitamin deficiencies is unknown. This study aimed to assess the (long-term) incidence of PEI and vitamin deficiencies after PD. METHODS: A bi-centre prospective observational cohort study was performed, including patients who underwent PD for mainly pancreatic and periampullary (pre)malignancies (2014-2018). Two cohorts were formed to evaluate short and long-term results. Patients were followed for 18 months and clinical symptoms were evaluated by questionnaire. PEI was based on faecal elastase-1 (FE-1) levels and/or clinical symptoms. RESULTS: In total, 95 patients were included. After three months, all but three patients had developed PEI and 27/29 (93%) patients of whom stool samples were available showed abnormal FE-1 levels, which did not improve during follow-up. After six months, all patients had developed PEI. During follow-up, symptoms resolved in 35%-70% of patients. Vitamin D and K deficiencies were observed in 48%-79% of patients, depending on the moment of follow-up; 0%-50% of the patients with deficiencies received vitamin supplementation. DISCUSSION: This prospective study found a high incidence of PEI after PD with persisting symptoms in one-to two thirds of all patients. Limited attention was paid to vitamin deficiencies. Improved screening and treatment strategies for PEI and vitamins need to be designed.

Preoperative biliary drainage in severely jaundiced patients with pancreatic head cancer: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines recommend against preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) in patients with pancreatic head cancer if bilirubin levels are <250 µmol/l. However, patients with higher bilirubin levels undergo PBD, despite the lack of supporting evidence. This study aims to evaluate outcomes in patients with a bilirubin level ≥250 and < 250. METHODS: Patients were identified from databases of 3 centers. Outcomes were compared in patients with a bilirubin level ≥250 versus <250 both at the time of diagnosis and directly prior to surgery. RESULTS: 244 patients were included. PBD was performed in 64% (123/191) with bilirubin <250 at diagnosis and 91% (48/53) with bilirubin ≥250. PBD technical success (83% vs. 81%, p = 0.80) and PBD related complications (33% vs. 29%, p = 0.60) did not differ between these groups. Analyzing bilirubin levels ≥250 versus <250 directly prior to surgery, no differences in severe postoperative complications and mortality were found. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with a pancreatic head cancer, PBD technical success and complications, and severe postoperative complications did not differ between patients with a bilirubin level ≥250 and < 250. Our study does not support a different approach regarding PBD in patients with severe jaundice.

Completion pancreatectomy or a pancreas-preserving procedure during relaparotomy for pancreatic fistula after pancreatoduodenectomy: a multicentre cohort study and meta-analysis.

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.

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

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

Stepwise implementation of robotic surgery in a high volume HPB practice in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Aims of this study were to describe the stepwise implementation and expansion of robotic HPB surgery in a high volume HPB unit in the Netherlands and to analyze clinical outcomes of all robotic liver resections and robotic pancreatoduodenectomies performed within this program. METHODS: After proctoring by expert international surgeons, HPB surgeons were introduced to robotic liver resection and robotic pancreatoduodenectomy in a stepwise fashion. Data from two prospective databases containing all consecutive patients who underwent robotic liver resection or robotic pancreatoduodenectomy between August 1st, 2015 and March 1st, 2019 were analyzed post hoc. RESULTS: In total, 77 consecutive robotic liver resections and 68 consecutive robotic pancreatoduodenectomies were performed. Five surgeons were consecutively introduced to robotic HPB surgery. Mean operative time for robotic liver resection was 160 ± 78 min. Mean operative time for robotic pancreatoduodenectomy was 420 ± 67 min. Operative times remained stable over time and were not affected by the introduction of new surgeons. CONCLUSION: Stepwise implementation and expansion of robotic HPB surgery within one unit over a three-and-half year period is feasible and associated with good clinical outcomes. Despite introducing new surgeons to the technique, operative times, an indicator of the learning process, remained stable over time.

Systematic review of functional outcome and quality of life after total pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Surgeons have traditionally been reluctant to perform total pancreatectomy because of concerns for brittle diabetes and poor quality of life (QoL). Several recent studies have suggested that outcomes following total pancreatectomy have improved, but a systematic review is lacking. METHODS: A systematic review was undertaken of studies reporting on outcomes after total pancreatectomy for all indications, except chronic pancreatitis. PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), and Cochrane Library were searched (2005-2018). Endpoints included functional outcome and QoL. RESULTS: A total of 21 studies, including 1536 patients, fulfilled the eligibility criteria. During a median follow-up of 20·8 (range 1·5-96·0) months, 18·6 per cent (45 of 242 patients) were readmitted for endocrine-related morbidity, with associated mortality in 1·6 per cent (6 of 365 patients). No diabetes-related mortality was reported in studies including only patients treated after 2005. Symptoms related to exocrine insufficiency were reported by 43·5 per cent (143 of 329 patients) during a median follow-up of 15·9 (1·5-96·0) months. Overall QoL, reported by 102 patients with a median follow-up of 28·6 (6·0-66·0) months, using the EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire, showed a moderately reduced summary score of 76 per cent, compared with a general population score of 86 per cent (P = 0·004). CONCLUSION: Overall QoL after total pancreatectomy is affected adversely, in particular by the considerable impact of diarrhoea that requires better treatment. There is also room for improvement in the management of diabetes after total pancreatectomy, particularly with regards to prevention of diabetes-related morbidity.

ANTECEDENTES: Los cirujanos tradicionalmente se han mostrado reacios a realizar una pancreatectomía total (total pancreatectomy, TP) debido a la preocupación por la aparición de diabetes lábil y la mala calidad de vida (quality of life, QoL). Varios estudios recientes han sugerido que el resultado de la TP ha mejorado, sin embargo no existe una revisión sistemática. MÉTODOS: Se ha realizado una revisión sistemática de los estudios que incluían los resultados después de una TP efectuada para todas las indicaciones, excepto para una pancreatitis crónica. Se realizaron búsquedas en PubMed, Embase (Ovid) y Cochrane Library (2005-2018). Los resultados principales eran el resultado funcional y la calidad de vida. RESULTADOS: En total, 21 estudios cumplieron los criterios de elegibilidad, incluyendo 1.536 pacientes que se habían sometido a una TP. Durante una mediana de seguimiento de 20,8 meses (rango 1,5-96,0), el 18,6% de los pacientes (45 de 242) fueron reingresados por morbilidad relacionada con la función endocrina, con una mortalidad asociada del 1,6% (6 de 365 pacientes). No hubo mortalidad relacionada con la diabetes en los estudios que incluyeron solo aquellos pacientes tratados después de 2005. Se observaron síntomas relacionados con insuficiencia exocrina en un 43,5% de los pacientes (143 de 329) durante una mediana de seguimiento de 15,9 meses (rango 1,5-96,0). La calidad de vida global, informada para 102 pacientes con una mediana de seguimiento de 28,6 meses (rango 6,0-66,0) utilizando el cuestionario EORTC QLQ-C30, mostró una puntuación sumatoria moderadamente reducida del 76% en comparación con la puntuación del 86% para la población general (P = 0,004). CONCLUSIÓN: Es necesario seguir mejorando el manejo de la diabetes después de la TP, sobre todo en lo que respecta a la prevención de la morbilidad relacionada con la diabetes. La calidad de vida global se ve afectada después de la TP y, especialmente, el impacto de la diarrea es considerable y requiere mejorar este aspecto en el futuro.

Nationwide comprehensive gastro-intestinal cancer cohorts: the 3P initiative.

BACKGROUND: The increasing sub-classification of cancer patients due to more detailed molecular classification of tumors, and limitations of current trial designs, require innovative research designs. We present the design, governance and current standing of three comprehensive nationwide cohorts including pancreatic, esophageal/gastric, and colorectal cancer patients (NCT02070146). Multidisciplinary collection of clinical data, tumor tissue, blood samples, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures with a nationwide coverage, provides the infrastructure for future and novel trial designs and facilitates research to improve outcomes of gastrointestinal cancer patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All patients aged ≥18 years with pancreatic, esophageal/gastric or colorectal cancer are eligible. Patients provide informed consent for: (1) reuse of clinical data; (2) biobanking of primary tumor tissue; (3) collection of blood samples; (4) to be informed about relevant newly identified genomic aberrations; (5) collection of longitudinal PROs; and (6) to receive information on new interventional studies and possible participation in cohort multiple randomized controlled trials (cmRCT) in the future. RESULTS: In 2015, clinical data of 21,758 newly diagnosed patients were collected in the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Additional clinical data on the surgical procedures were registered in surgical audits for 13,845 patients. Within the first two years, tumor tissue and blood samples were obtained from 1507 patients; during this period, 1180 patients were included in the PRO registry. Response rate for PROs was 90%. The consent rate to receive information on new interventional studies and possible participation in cmRCTs in the future was >85%. The number of hospitals participating in the cohorts is steadily increasing. CONCLUSION: A comprehensive nationwide multidisciplinary gastrointestinal cancer cohort is feasible and surpasses the limitations of classical study designs. With this initiative, novel and innovative studies can be performed in an efficient, safe, and comprehensive setting.

Metal or plastic stents for preoperative biliary drainage in resectable pancreatic cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In pancreatic cancer, preoperative biliary drainage (PBD) increases complications compared with surgery without PBD, demonstrated by a recent randomised controlled trial (RCT). This outcome might be related to the plastic endoprosthesis used. Metal stents may reduce the PBD-related complications risk. METHODS: A prospective multicentre cohort study was performed including patients with obstructive jaundice due to pancreatic cancer, scheduled to undergo PBD before surgery. This cohort was added to the earlier RCT (ISRCTN31939699). The RCT protocol was adhered to, except PBD was performed with a fully covered self-expandable metal stent (FCSEMS). This FCSEMS cohort was compared with the RCT's plastic stent cohort. PBD-related complications were the primary outcome. Three-group comparison of overall complications including early surgery patients was performed. RESULTS: 53 patients underwent PBD with FCSEMS compared with 102 patients treated with plastic stents. Patients' characteristics did not differ. PBD-related complication rates were 24% in the FCSEMS group vs 46% in the plastic stent group (relative risk of plastic stent use 1.9, 95% CI 1.1 to 3.2, p=0.011). Stent-related complications (occlusion and exchange) were 6% vs 31%. Surgical complications did not differ, 40% vs 47%. Overall complication rates for the FCSEMS, plastic stent and early surgery groups were 51% vs 74% vs 39%. CONCLUSIONS: For PBD in pancreatic cancer, FCSEMS yield a better outcome compared with plastic stents. Although early surgery without PBD remains the treatment of choice, FCSEMS should be preferred over plastic stents whenever PBD is indicated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Dutch Trial Registry (NTR3142).

Health-related quality of life after pancreatic resection for malignancy.

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (QoL) is of major importance in pancreatic cancer, owing to the limited life expectation. The aim of this prospective longitudinal study was to describe QoL in patients undergoing resection for pancreatic or periampullary malignancy. METHODS: QoL was measured on a scale of 0-100 in patients who underwent pancreatic resection for malignancy or premalignancy at the University Medical Centre Utrecht before resection, and 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. Measures consisted of the RAND-36, the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) core questionnaire (QLQ-C30) and the EORTC pancreatic cancer-specific module (QLQ-PAN26). RESULTS: Between March 2012 and November 2013, 68 consecutive patients with a malignancy (59 patients) or premalignancy (9) were included. Physical role restriction, social and emotional domains showed a significant and clinically relevant deterioration directly after operation in 53 per cent (RAND-36, P < 0.001), 63 and 78 per cent (QLQ-C30 and RAND-36 respectively, P < 0.001) and 37 per cent (RAND-36, P < 0.001) of patients respectively. Most domains demonstrated recovery to preoperative values or better at 3 months, except for physical functioning. Emotional functioning at 3, 6 and 12 months was better than at baseline (P < 0.001). Symptom scores revealed a deterioration in vitality, pain (P = 0.002), fatigue (P < 0.001), appetite loss (P < 0.001), altered bowel habit (P = 0.001) and side-effects (P < 0.001) after 1 month. After 3 months, only side-effects were worse than preoperative values (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: QoL after pancreatic resection for malignant and premalignant tumours decreased considerably in the early postoperative phase. Full recovery of QoL took up to 6 months after the operation.

Hospital of diagnosis and likelihood of surgical treatment for pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Surgical resection for pancreatic cancer offers the only chance of cure. Assessment of the resectability of a pancreatic tumour is therefore of great importance. The aim of the study was to investigate whether centre of diagnosis influences the likelihood of surgery and whether this affects long-term survival. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with non-metastasized pancreatic cancer (M0) between 2005 and 2013 in the Netherlands were selected from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Hospitals were classified as a pancreatic centre (at least 20 resections/year) or a non-pancreatic centre (fewer than 20 resections/year). The relationship between centre of diagnosis and likelihood of surgery was analysed by multivariable logistic regression. Influence of centre on overall survival was assessed by means of multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Some 8141 patients were diagnosed with non-metastasized pancreatic cancer, of whom 3123 (38·4 per cent) underwent surgery. Of the 2712 patients diagnosed in one of 19 pancreatic centres, 52·4 per cent had exploratory laparotomy compared with 31·4 per cent of 5429 patients diagnosed in one of 74 non-pancreatic centres (P < 0·001). A pancreatectomy was performed in 42·8 and 24·6 per cent of the patients respectively (P < 0·001). Multivariable analysis revealed that patients diagnosed in a pancreatic centre had a higher chance of undergoing surgery (odds ratio 2·21, 95 per cent c.i. 1·98 to 2·47). Centre of diagnosis was not associated with improved long-term survival (hazard ratio 0·95, 95 per cent c.i. 0·91 to 1·00). CONCLUSION: Patients with non-metastasized pancreatic cancer had a greater likelihood of having surgical treatment when the diagnosis was established in a pancreatic centre.

Systematic review of innovative ablative therapies for the treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: Locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) is associated with a very poor prognosis. Current palliative (radio)chemotherapy provides only a marginal survival benefit of 2-3 months. Several innovative local ablative therapies have been explored as new treatment options. This systematic review aims to provide an overview of the clinical outcomes of these ablative therapies. METHODS: A systematic search in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library was performed to identify clinical studies, published before 1 June 2014, involving ablative therapies in LAPC. Outcomes of interest were safety, survival, quality of life and pain. RESULTS: After screening 1037 articles, 38 clinical studies involving 1164 patients with LAPC, treated with ablative therapies, were included. These studies concerned radiofrequency ablation (RFA) (7 studies), irreversible electroporation (IRE) (4), stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT) (16), high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) (5), iodine-125 (2), iodine-125-cryosurgery (2), photodynamic therapy (1) and microwave ablation (1). All strategies appeared to be feasible and safe. Outcomes for postoperative, procedure-related morbidity and mortality were reported only for RFA (4-22 and 0-11 per cent respectively), IRE (9-15 and 0-4 per cent) and SBRT (0-25 and 0 per cent). Median survival of up to 25·6, 20·2, 24·0 and 12·6 months was reported for RFA, IRE, SBRT and HIFU respectively. Pain relief was demonstrated for RFA, IRE, SBRT and HIFU. Quality-of-life outcomes were reported only for SBRT, and showed promising results. CONCLUSION: Ablative therapies in patients with LAPC appear to be feasible and safe.

Impact of centralization of pancreatic cancer surgery on resection rates and survival.

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.

Recurrent disease detection after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma using a recurrence-focused surveillance strategy (RADAR-PANC): protocol of an international randomized controlled trial according to the Trials within Cohorts design.

BACKGROUND: Disease recurrence remains one of the biggest concerns in patients after resection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). Despite (neo)adjuvant systemic therapy, most patients experience local and/or distant PDAC recurrence within 2 years. High-level evidence regarding the benefits of recurrence-focused surveillance after PDAC resection is missing, and the impact of early detection and treatment of recurrence on survival and quality of life is unknown. In most European countries, recurrence-focused follow-up after surgery for PDAC is currently lacking. Consequently, guidelines regarding postoperative surveillance are based on expert opinion and other low-level evidence. The recent emergence of more potent local and systemic treatment options for PDAC recurrence has increased interest in early diagnosis. To determine whether early detection and treatment of recurrence can lead to improved survival and quality of life, we designed an international randomized trial. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial is nested within an existing prospective cohort in pancreatic cancer centers in the Netherlands (Dutch Pancreatic Cancer Project; PACAP) and the United Kingdom (UK) (Pancreas Cancer: Observations of Practice and survival; PACOPS) according to the "Trials within Cohorts" (TwiCs) design. All PACAP/PACOPS participants with a macroscopically radical resection (R0-R1) of histologically confirmed PDAC, who provided informed consent for TwiCs and participation in quality of life questionnaires, are included. Participants randomized to the intervention arm are offered recurrence-focused surveillance, existing of clinical evaluation, serum cancer antigen (CA) 19-9 testing, and contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT) of chest and abdomen every three months during the first 2 years after surgery. Participants in the control arm of the study will undergo non-standardized clinical follow-up, generally consisting of clinical follow-up with imaging and serum tumor marker testing only in case of onset of symptoms, according to local practice in the participating hospital. The primary endpoint is overall survival. Secondary endpoints include quality of life, patterns of recurrence, compliance to and costs of recurrence-focused follow-up, and the impact on recurrence-focused treatment. DISCUSSION: The RADAR-PANC trial will be the first randomized controlled trial to generate high level evidence for the current clinical equipoise regarding the value of recurrence-focused postoperative surveillance with serial tumor marker testing and routine imaging in patients after PDAC resection. The Trials within Cohort design allows us to study the acceptability of recurrence-focused surveillance among cohort participants and increases the generalizability of findings to the general population. While it is strongly encouraged to offer all trial participants treatment at time of recurrence diagnosis, type and timing of treatment will be determined through shared decision-making. This might reduce the potential survival benefits of recurrence-focused surveillance, although insights into the impact on patients' quality of life will be obtained. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT04875325 . Registered on May 6, 2021.