The impact of nutritional status on pancreatic cancer therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive disease with poor outcomes. One of the reasons for the dismal prognosis resides in its impressive ability to alter the nutritional status of patients who develop malnutrition, cachexia, anorexia, and sarcopenia in most cases. The ideal way to measure such changes in PDAC patients, in order to readily identify them and avoid complications or discontinuations of treatment is a relatively unexplored area. In addition, most PDAC patients experience pancreatic exocrine insufficiency (PEI) that contributes to the complex puzzle of malnutrition and that can be treated with Pancreatic Enzyme Replacement Therapy (PERT). AREAS COVERED: We review current knowledge on the impact of nutritional status on both surgical and medical treatments for PDAC, reporting available data on the causes of malnutrition, characteristics, and advantages of different tools to investigate nutritional status and possible strategies to improve patient outcomes. EXPERT OPINION: All PDAC patients should receive a careful nutritional assessment at diagnosis, and this should be repeated alongside their treatment path. Screening tools and biochemical variables or scores are associated with prognosis, but bioimpedance vector analysis (BIVA) and radiological assessment of body composition seem more accurate in predicting clinical outcomes and postoperative complications.

Resectability of Pancreatic Cancer Is in the Eye of the Observer: A Multicenter, Blinded, Prospective Assessment of Interobserver Agreement on NCCN Resectability Status Criteria.

Objectives: To determine the reproducibility of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) resectability status classification for pancreatic cancer. Background: The NCCN classification defines 3 resectability classes (resectable, borderline resectable, locally advanced), according to vascular invasion. It is used to recommend different approaches and stratify patients during clinical trials. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, observational study (trial ID: NCT03673423). Main outcome measure was the interobserver agreement of tumor assignment to different resectability classes and quantification of vascular invasion degrees. Agreement was measured by Fleiss' k (k = 1 perfect agreement; k = 0 agreement by chance). Sixty-nine computed tomography (CT) scans of pathologically confirmed pancreatic adenocarcinoma were independently reviewed in a blinded fashion by 22 observers from 11 hospitals (11 surgeons and 11 radiologists). Rating differences between surgeons or radiologists and between hospitals with different volumes (≥60 or <60 resections/year) were assessed. Results: Complete agreement among 22 observers was recorded in 5 CT scans (7.2%), whereas 25 CT scans (36.2%) were variously assigned to all 3 resectability classes. Interobserver agreement varied from fair to moderate (Fleiss' k range: 0.282-0.555), with the lowest agreement for borderline resectable tumors. Assessing vascular contact ≤180° had the lowest agreement for all vessels (k range: 0.196-0.362). The highest concordance was recorded for venous invasion >180° (k range: 0.619-0.756). Neither reviewers' specialty nor hospital volume influenced the agreement. Conclusions: There is high variability in the assignment to resectability categories, which may compromise the reliability of treatments recommendations and the evidence of trials stratifying patients in resectability classes. Criteria should be revised to allow a reproducible classification.