The Natural Disease Course of Pancreatic Cyst-Associated Neoplasia, Dysplasia, and Ductal Adenocarcinoma: Results of a Microsimulation Model.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Estimates on the progression of precursor lesions to pancreatic cancer (PC) are scarce. We used microsimulation modeling to gain insight into the natural disease course of PC and its precursors. This information is pivotal to explore the efficacy of PC screening. METHODS: A Microsimulation Screening Analysis model was developed in which pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasms and cysts can evolve from low-grade dysplasia (LGD) to high-grade dysplasia (HGD) to PC. The model was calibrated to Dutch PC incidence data and Japanese precursor prevalence data (autopsy cases without PC) and provides estimates of PC progression (precursor lesion onset and stage duration). RESULTS: Mean LGD state durations of cysts and pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasms were 15.8 years and 17.1 years, respectively. Mean HGD state duration was 5.8 years. For lesions that progress to PC, the mean duration was 4.8-4.9 years for LGD lesions and 4.0-4.1 years for HGD lesions. In 13.7% of individuals who developed PC, the HGD state lasted less than 1 year. The probability that an individual at age 50 years developed PC in the next 20 years was estimated to be 1.8% in the presence of any cyst and 6.1% in case of an LGD mucinous cyst. This 20-year PC risk was estimated to be 5.1% for individuals with an LGD pancreatic intraepithelial neoplasm. CONCLUSIONS: Mean duration of HGD lesions before development of PC was estimated to be 4.0 years. This implies a window of opportunity for screening, presuming the availability of a reliable diagnostic test. The probability that an LGD cyst will progress to cancer was predicted to be low.

Intraductal Papillary Mucinous Neoplasms in High-Risk Individuals: Incidence, Growth Rate, and Malignancy Risk.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: In high-risk individuals (HRIs), we aimed to assess the cumulative incidence of intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasms (IPMNs) and compare IPMN growth, neoplastic progression rate, and the value of growth as predictor for neoplastic progression to these in sporadic IPMNs. METHODS: We performed annual surveillance of Dutch HRIs, involving carriers of germline pathogenic variants (PVs) and PV-negative familial pancreatic cancer kindreds. HRIs with IPMNs were compared with Italian individuals without familial risk under surveillance for sporadic IPMNs. RESULTS: A total of 457 HRIs were followed for 48 (range 2-172) months; the estimated cumulative IPMN incidence was 46% (95% confidence interval, 28%-64%). In comparison with 442 control individuals, IPMNs in HRIs were more likely to grow ≥2.5 mm/y (31% vs 7%; P < .001) and develop worrisome features (32% vs 19%; P = .010). PV carriers with IPMNs more often displayed neoplastic progression (n = 3 [11%] vs n = 6 [1%]; P = .011), while familial pancreatic cancer kindreds did not (n = 0 [0%]; P = 1.000). The malignancy risk in a PV carrier with an IPMN was 23% for growth rates ≥2.5 mm/y (n = 13), 30% for ≥5 mm/y (n = 10), and 60% for ≥10 mm/y (n = 5). CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative incidence of IPMNs in HRIs is higher than previously reported in the general population. Compared with sporadic IPMNs, they have an increased growth rate. PV carriers with IPMNs are suggested to be at a higher malignancy risk. Intensive follow-up should be considered for PV carriers with an IPMN growing ≥2.5 mm/y, and surgical resection for those growing ≥5 mm/y.

Type 1 Autoimmune Pancreatitis in Europe: Clinical Profile and Response to Treatment.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Autoimmune pancreatitis (AIP) is an immune-mediated disease of the pancreas with distinct pathophysiology and manifestations. Our aims were to characterize type 1 AIP in a large pan-European cohort and study the effectiveness of current treatment regimens. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed adults diagnosed since 2005 with type 1 or not-otherwise-specified AIP in 42 European university hospitals. Type 1 AIP was uniformly diagnosed using specific diagnostic criteria. Patients with type 2 AIP and those who had undergone pancreatic surgery were excluded. The primary end point was complete remission, defined as the absence of clinical symptoms and resolution of the index radiologic pancreatic abnormalities attributed to AIP. RESULTS: We included 735 individuals with AIP (69% male; median age, 57 years; 85% White). Steroid treatment was started in 634 patients, of whom 9 (1%) were lost to follow-up. The remaining 625 had a 79% (496/625) complete, 18% (111/625) partial, and 97% (607/625) cumulative remission rate, whereas 3% (18/625) did not achieve remission. No treatment was given in 95 patients, who had a 61% complete (58/95), 19% partial (18/95), and 80% cumulative (76/95) spontaneous remission rate. Higher (≥0.4 mg/kg/day) corticosteroid doses were no more effective than lower (<0.4 mg/kg/day) doses (odds ratio, 0.428; 95% confidence interval, 0.054-3.387) and neither was a starting dose duration >2 weeks (odds ratio, 0.908; 95% confidence interval, 0.818-1.009). Elevated IgG4 levels were independently associated with a decreased chance of complete remission (odds ratio, 0.639; 95% confidence interval, 0.427-0.955). Relapse occurred in 30% of patients. Relapses within 6 months of remission induction were independent of the steroid-tapering duration, induction treatment duration, and total cumulative dose. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 1 AIP and elevated IgG4 level may need closer monitoring. For remission induction, a starting dose of 0.4 mg/kg/day for 2 weeks followed by a short taper period seems effective. This study provides no evidence to support more aggressive regimens.

The impact of pancreatic cancer screening on life expectancy: A systematic review of modeling studies.

Evidence supporting the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer (PC) screening is scant. Most clinical studies concern small populations with short follow-up durations. Mathematical models are useful to estimate long-term effects of PC screening using short-term indicators. This systematic review aims to evaluate the impact of PC screening on life expectancy (LE) in model-based studies. Therefore, we searched four databases (Embase, Medline, Web-of-science, Cochrane) until 30 May 2022 to identify model-based studies evaluating the impact of PC screening on LE in different risk populations. Two authors independently screened identified papers, extracted data and assessed the methodological quality of studies. A descriptive analysis was performed and the impact of screening strategies on LE of different risk groups was reported. Our search resulted in 419 studies, of which eight met the eligibility criteria (mathematical model, PC screening, LE). Reported relative risks (RR) for PC varied from 1 to 70. In higher risk individuals (RR > 5), annual screening (by imaging with 56% sensitivity for HGD/early stage PC) predicted to increase LE of screened individuals by 20 to 260 days. In the general population, one-time PC screening was estimated to decrease LE (2-110 days), depending on the test characteristics and treatment mortality risk. In conclusion, although the models use different and sometimes outdated or unrealistic assumptions, it seems that PC screening in high-risk populations improves LE, and that this gain increases with a higher PC risk. Updated model studies, with data from large clinical trials are necessary to predict the long-term effect of PC screening more accurately.

Timeline of Development of Pancreatic Cancer and Implications for Successful Early Detection in High-Risk Individuals.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: To successfully implement imaging-based pancreatic cancer (PC) surveillance, understanding the timeline and morphologic features of neoplastic progression is key. We aimed to investigate the progression to neoplasia from serial prediagnostic pancreatic imaging tests in high-risk individuals and identify factors associated with successful early detection. METHODS: We retrospectively examined the development of pancreatic abnormalities in high-risk individuals who were diagnosed with PC or underwent pancreatic surgery, or both, in 16 international surveillance programs. RESULTS: Of 2552 high-risk individuals under surveillance, 28 (1%) developed neoplastic progression to PC or high-grade dysplasia during a median follow-up of 29 months after baseline (interquartile range [IQR], 40 months). Of these, 13 of 28 (46%) presented with a new lesion (median size, 15 mm; range 7-57 mm), a median of 11 months (IQR, 8; range 3-17 months) after a prior examination, by which time 10 of 13 (77%) had progressed beyond the pancreas. The remaining 15 of 28 (54%) had neoplastic progression in a previously detected lesion (12 originally cystic, 2 indeterminate, 1 solid), and 11 (73%) had PC progressed beyond the pancreas. The 12 patients with cysts had been monitored for 21 months (IQR, 15 months) and had a median growth of 5 mm/y (IQR, 8 mm/y). Successful early detection (as high-grade dysplasia or PC confined to the pancreas) was associated with resection of cystic lesions (vs solid or indeterminate lesions (odds ratio, 5.388; 95% confidence interval, 1.525-19.029) and small lesions (odds ratio, 0.890/mm; 95% confidence interval 0.812-0.976/mm). CONCLUSIONS: In nearly half of high-risk individuals developing high-grade dysplasia or PC, no prior lesions are detected by imaging, yet they present at an advanced stage. Progression can occur before the next scheduled annual examination. More sensitive diagnostic tools or a different management strategy for rapidly growing cysts are needed.

An 8q24 Gain in Pancreatic Juice Is a Candidate Biomarker for the Detection of Pancreatic Cancer.

Secretin-stimulated pancreatic juice (PJ), collected from the duodenum, presents a valuable biomarker source for the (earlier) detection of pancreatic cancer (PC). Here, we evaluate the feasibility and performance of shallow sequencing to detect copy number variations (CNVs) in cell-free DNA (cfDNA) from PJ for PC detection. First, we confirmed the feasibility of shallow sequencing in PJ (n = 4), matched plasma (n = 3) and tissue samples (n = 4, microarray). Subsequently, shallow sequencing was performed on cfDNA from PJ of 26 cases (25 sporadic PC, 1 high-grade dysplasia) and 19 controls with a hereditary or familial increased risk of PC. 40 of the 45 PJ samples met the quality criteria for cfDNA analysis. Nine individuals had an 8q24 gain (oncogene MYC; 23%; eight cases (33%) and one control (6%), p = 0.04); six had both a 2q gain (STAT1) and 5p loss (CDH10; 15%; four cases (7%) and two controls (13%), p = 0.72). The presence of an 8q24 gain differentiated the cases and controls, with a sensitivity of 33% (95% CI 16-55%) and specificity of 94% (95% CI 70-100%). The presence of either an 8q24 or 2q gain with a 5p loss was related to a sensitivity of 50% (95% CI 29-71%) and specificity of 81% (95% CI 54-96%). Shallow sequencing of PJ is feasible. The presence of an 8q24 gain in PJ shows promise as a biomarker for the detection of PC. Further research is required with a larger sample size and consecutively collected samples in high-risk individuals prior to implementation in a surveillance cohort.

Mutation Analysis of Pancreatic Juice and Plasma for the Detection of Pancreatic Cancer.

Molecular profiling may enable earlier detection of pancreatic cancer (PC) in high-risk individuals undergoing surveillance and allow for personalization of treatment. We hypothesized that the detection rate of DNA mutations is higher in pancreatic juice (PJ) than in plasma due to its closer contact with the pancreatic ductal system, from which pancreatic cancer cells originate, and higher overall cell-free DNA (cfDNA) concentrations. In this study, we included patients with pathology-proven PC or intraductal papillary mucinous neoplasm (IPMN) with high-grade dysplasia (HGD) from two prospective clinical trials (KRASPanc and PACYFIC) for whom both PJ and plasma were available. We performed next-generation sequencing on PJ, plasma, and tissue samples and described the presence (and concordance) of mutations in these biomaterials. This study included 26 patients (25 PC and 1 IPMN with HGD), of which 7 were women (27%), with a median age of 71 years (IQR 12) and a median BMI of 23 kg/m2 (IQR 4). Ten patients with PC (40%) were (borderline) resectable at baseline. Tissue was available from six patients (resection n = 5, biopsy n = 1). A median volume of 2.9 mL plasma (IQR 1.0 mL) and 0.7 mL PJ (IQR 0.1 mL, p < 0.001) was used for DNA isolation. PJ had a higher median cfDNA concentration (2.6 ng/µL (IQR 4.2)) than plasma (0.29 ng/µL (IQR 0.40)). A total of 41 unique somatic mutations were detected: 24 mutations in plasma (2 KRAS, 15 TP53, 2 SMAD4, 3 CDKN2A 1 CTNNB1, and 1 PIK3CA), 19 in PJ (3 KRAS, 15 TP53, and 1 SMAD4), and 8 in tissue (2 KRAS, 2 CDKN2A, and 4 TP53). The mutation detection rate (and the concordance with tissue) did not differ between plasma and PJ. In conclusion, while the concentration of cfDNA was indeed higher in PJ than in plasma, the mutation detection rate was not different. A few cancer-associated genetic variants were detected in both biomaterials. Further research is needed to increase the detection rate and assess the performance and suitability of plasma and PJ for PC (early) detection.

Long-term yield of pancreatic cancer surveillance in high-risk individuals.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to determine the long-term yield of pancreatic cancer surveillance in hereditary predisposed high-risk individuals. DESIGN: From 2006 to 2019, we prospectively enrolled asymptomatic individuals with an estimated 10% or greater lifetime risk of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) after obligatory evaluation by a clinical geneticist and genetic testing, and subjected them to annual surveillance with both endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) and MRI/cholangiopancreatography (MRI/MRCP) at each visit. RESULTS: 366 individuals (201 mutation-negative familial pancreatic cancer (FPC) kindreds and 165 PDAC susceptibility gene mutation carriers; mean age 54 years, SD 9.9) were followed for 63 months on average (SD 43.2). Ten individuals developed PDAC, of which four presented with a symptomatic interval carcinoma and six underwent resection. The cumulative PDAC incidence was 9.3% in the mutation carriers and 0% in the FPC kindreds (p<0.001). Median PDAC survival was 18 months (range 1-32). Surgery was performed in 17 individuals (4.6%), whose pathology revealed 6 PDACs (3 T1N0M0), 7 low-grade precursor lesions, 2 neuroendocrine tumours <2 cm, 1 autoimmune pancreatitis and in 1 individual no abnormality. There was no surgery-related mortality. EUS detected more solid lesions than MRI/MRCP (100% vs 22%, p<0.001), but less cystic lesions (42% vs 83%, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic yield of PDAC was substantial in established high-risk mutation carriers, but non-existent in the mutation-negative proven FPC kindreds. Nevertheless, timely identification of resectable lesions proved challenging despite the concurrent use of two imaging modalities, with EUS outperforming MRI/MRCP. Overall, surveillance by imaging yields suboptimal results with a clear need for more sensitive diagnostic markers, including biomarkers.

Extracellular vesicle-derived microRNAs in pancreatic juice as biomarkers for detection of pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is usually diagnosed in an advanced stage, with minimal likelihood of long-term survival. Only a small subset of patients are diagnosed with early (T1) disease. Early detection is challenging due to the late onset of symptoms and limited visibility of sub-centimeter cancers on imaging. A novel approach is to support the clinical diagnosis with molecular markers. MicroRNA derived from extracellular vehicles (EVs) in blood has shown promise as a potential biomarker for pancreatic neoplasia, but microRNA derived from pancreatic juice (PJ) may be a more sensitive biomarker, given that is in close contact with ductal cells from which PDAC arises. This study aims to evaluate and compare the performance of PJ- and serum-derived EV-miRNA for the detection of PDAC. METHODS: PJ was collected from the duodenum during EUS after secretin stimulation from 54 patients with PDAC and 118 non-malignant controls. Serum was available for a subset of these individuals. MiR-16, miR-21, miR-25, miR-155 and miR-210 derived from EVs isolated from PJ and serum were analyzed by qPCR, and serum CA19-9 levels were determined by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. For statistical analysis, either a Mann-Whitney U test or a Wilcoxon Signed Rank test was performed. ROC curves and AUC were used to assess the sensitivity and specificity of miR expression for PDAC detection. RESULTS: Expression of EV-miR-21, EV-miR-25 and EV-miR-16 were increased in cases vs controls in PJ, while only EV-miR-210 was increased in serum. The potential to detect PC was good for a combination of PJ EV-miR-21, EV-miR-25, EV-miR-16 and serum miR-210, CA-19-9, with an area under the curve of 0.91, a specificity of 84.2% and a sensitivity of 81.5%. CONCLUSION: Detection of miRNA from EVs in PJ is feasible. A combined panel of PJ EV-miR-21, EV-miR-25, EV-miR-16, and serum EV-miR-210 and CA19-9 distinguishes cases with PDAC from controls undergoing surveillance with a specificity of 81.5% and sensitivity of 84.2%.

Protein biomarkers in pancreatic juice and serum for identification of pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: To date, surveillance of high-risk individuals for pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) has not lived up to expectations, as identification of curable stages through imaging remains challenging. Biomarkers are therefore needed. Pancreatic juice (PJ) may be a promising source, because it is in direct contact with the ductal epithelial lining from which PDAC arises. We aimed to develop a panel of biomarkers from serum and PJ to detect PDAC for future surveillance purposes. METHODS: All patients who underwent PJ collection on secretin stimulation at the Erasmus MC were included. Both PJ and serum were evaluated. Protein levels were determined by the Lowry assay. Potential biomarkers (interleukin-8, interferon-γ, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin [NGAL], mucin 5, subtype AC [MUC5AC], mucin 2, phospholipase A2 group IB) were selected based on previously reported outcomes and assessed with enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Serum carbohydrate antigen 19-9 (CA19-9) values were determined by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. RESULTS: This study included 59 cases and 126 surveilled control subjects (who underwent PJ collection), of whom 71 had a hereditary predisposition (35 genetic, 36 familial) and 55 had (suspected neoplastic) pancreatic cysts. CA19-9 values were available for 53 cases and 48 control subjects. Serum CA19-9, as well as PJ interleukin-8, NGAL and MUC5AC, were associated with PDAC independent of age, gender, and presence of diabetes mellitus. Serum CA19-9 had a significantly higher area under the curve (AUC; .86; 95% confidence interval [CI], .79-.94) than individual PJ markers (AUC, .62-.70). A combination of PJ markers and serum CA19-9 (panel 2: sensitivity 42% [95% CI, 29-57] and specificity 96% [95% CI, 86-100]) did not improve diagnostic performance compared with CA19-9 alone (sensitivity 70% [95% CI, 56-82] and specificity 85% [95% CI, 72-94]). CONCLUSIONS: High levels of serum CA19-9 and PJ-derived proteins are associated with PDAC. Prospective surveillance studies including individuals at risk of developing PDAC are required to validate these findings.

Genotype-phenotype correlations for pancreatic cancer risk in Dutch melanoma families with pathogenic CDKN2A variants.

BACKGROUND: Pathogenic variants in the CDKN2A gene are generally associated with the development of melanoma and pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC), but specific genotype-phenotype correlations might exist and the extent of PDAC risk is not well established for many variants. METHODS: Using the Dutch national familial melanoma database, we identified all families with a pathogenic CDKN2A variant and investigated the occurrence of PDAC within these families. We also estimated the standardised incidence ratio and lifetime PDAC risk for carriers of a highly prevalent variant in these families. RESULTS: We identified 172 families in which 649 individuals carried 15 different pathogenic variants. The most prevalent variant was the founder mutation c.225_243del (p16-Leiden, 484 proven carriers). Second most prevalent was c.67G>C (55 proven carriers). PDAC developed in 95 of 163 families (58%, including 373 of 629 proven carriers) harbouring a variant with an effect on the p16INK4a protein, whereas PDAC did not occur in the 9 families (20 proven carriers) with a variant affecting only p14ARF. In the c.67G>C families, PDAC occurred in 12 of the 251 (5%) persons at risk. The standardised incidence ratio was 19.1 (95% CI 8.3 to 33.6) and the cumulative PDAC incidence at age 75 years (lifetime risk) was 19% (95% CI 7.5% to 30.1%). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the notion that pathogenic CDKN2A variants affecting the p16INK4a protein, including c.67G>C, are associated with increased PDAC risk and carriers of such variants should be offered pancreatic cancer surveillance. There is no clinical evidence that impairment of only the p14ARF protein leads to an increased PDAC risk.

Identifying key factors for the effectiveness of pancreatic cancer screening: A model-based analysis.

Pancreatic cancer (PC) survival is poor, as detection usually occurs late, when treatment options are limited. Screening of high-risk individuals may enable early detection and a more favorable prognosis. Knowledge gaps prohibit establishing the effectiveness of screening. We developed a Microsimulation Screening Analysis model to analyze the impact of relevant uncertainties on the effect of PC screening in high-risk individuals. The model simulates two base cases: one in which lesions always progress to PC and one in which indolent and faster progressive lesions coexist. For each base case, the effect of annual and 5-yearly screening with endoscopic ultrasonography/magnetic resonance imaging was evaluated. The impact of variance in PC risk, screening test characteristics and surgery-related mortality was evaluated using sensitivity analyses. Screening resulted in a reduction of PC mortality by at least 16% in all simulated scenarios. This reduction depended strongly on the natural disease course (annual screening: -57% for "Progressive-only" vs -41% for "Indolent Included"). The number of screen and surveillance tests needed to prevent one cancer death was impacted most by PC risk. A 10% increase in test sensitivity reduced mortality by 1.9% at most. Test specificity is important for the number of surveillance tests. In conclusion, screening reduces PC mortality in all modeled scenarios. The natural disease course and PC risk strongly determines the effectiveness of screening. Test sensitivity seems of lesser influence than specificity. Future research should gain more insight in PC pathobiology to establish the true value of PC screening in high-risk individuals.

Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided tissue acquisition is extensively used, but the optimal sampling device is still a matter of debate. We performed meta-analyses on studies comparing fine-needle aspiration (FNA) with fine-needle biopsy (FNB) needles, and studies comparing different FNB needles. METHODS: Online databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of at least 50 cases with a suspected solid pancreatic or nonpancreatic lesion that compared FNA with FNB needles. Outcome measures included diagnostic accuracy, adequacy, number of passes, presence of tissue cores, and adverse events. We also performed meta-regression analysis on the effect of FNB design on diagnostic accuracy. Quality was assessed using the QUADAS-2 tool. RESULTS: 18 RCTs comparing FNA with FNB needles were included. FNB provided a higher pooled diagnostic accuracy (87 % vs. 80 %; P = 0.02) and tissue core rate (80 % vs. 62 %; P = 0.002), and allowed diagnosis with fewer passes (P = 0.03), in both pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesions. A total of 93 studies were included comparing different FNB devices. Pooled diagnostic accuracy was higher for forward-facing bevel needles than for the reverse bevel needle. In this analysis, study quality was low and heterogeneity was high (I2  = 80 %). CONCLUSION: FNB outperformed FNA when sampling pancreatic and nonpancreatic lesions. Forward-facing bevel FNB needles seemed to outperform the reverse bevel FNB needle, but the low quality of evidence prevents us from making strong recommendations on the optimal FNB design.

Management of patients with increased risk for familial pancreatic cancer: updated recommendations from the International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening (CAPS) Consortium.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The International Cancer of the Pancreas Screening Consortium met in 2018 to update its consensus recommendations for the management of individuals with increased risk of pancreatic cancer based on family history or germline mutation status (high-risk individuals). METHODS: A modified Delphi approach was employed to reach consensus among a multidisciplinary group of experts who voted on consensus statements. Consensus was considered reached if ≥75% agreed or disagreed. RESULTS: Consensus was reached on 55 statements. The main goals of surveillance (to identify high-grade dysplastic precursor lesions and T1N0M0 pancreatic cancer) remained unchanged. Experts agreed that for those with familial risk, surveillance should start no earlier than age 50 or 10 years earlier than the youngest relative with pancreatic cancer, but were split on whether to start at age 50 or 55. Germline ATM mutation carriers with one affected first-degree relative are now considered eligible for surveillance. Experts agreed that preferred surveillance tests are endoscopic ultrasound and MRI/magnetic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, but no consensus was reached on how to alternate these modalities. Annual surveillance is recommended in the absence of concerning lesions. Main areas of disagreement included if and how surveillance should be performed for hereditary pancreatitis, and the management of indeterminate lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Pancreatic surveillance is recommended for selected high-risk individuals to detect early pancreatic cancer and its high-grade precursors, but should be performed in a research setting by multidisciplinary teams in centres with appropriate expertise. Until more evidence supporting these recommendations is available, the benefits, risks and costs of surveillance of pancreatic surveillance need additional evaluation.

Optimization of Pancreatic Juice Collection: A First Step Toward Biomarker Discovery and Early Detection of Pancreatic Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Imaging-based surveillance programs fail to detect pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma at a curable stage, creating an urgent need for diagnostic biomarkers. METHODS: Secretin-stimulated pancreatic juice (PJ) was collected from the duodenal lumen during endoscopic ultrasound. The yield of biomarkers and organoids was compared for 2 collection techniques (endoscope suction channel vs catheter-based) and 3 periods (0-4 vs 4-8 vs 8-15 minutes). RESULTS: Collection through the endoscope suction channel was superior to collection with a catheter. Collection beyond 8 minutes reduced biomarker yield. PJ-derived organoid culture was feasible. DISCUSSION: The optimal protocol for secretin-stimulated PJ collection is through the endoscope suction channel for 8 minutes allowing biomarker detection and organoid culture.

Combined versus single use 20 G fine-needle biopsy and 25 G fine-needle aspiration for endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling of solid gastrointestinal lesions.

BACKGROUND: Instead of choosing one endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) needle over the other, some advocate the use of fine-needle aspiration (FNA) and fine-needle biopsy (FNB) consecutively. We explored the yield of combined use of 20 G FNB and 25 G FNA needles in patients with a suspicious solid gastrointestinal lesion. METHODS: Patients from the ASPRO study who were sampled with both needles during the same procedure were included. The incremental yield of dual sampling compared with the yield of single needle use on the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy was assessed for both dual sampling approaches - FNA followed by FNB, and vice versa. RESULTS: 73 patients were included. There were 39 (53 %) pancreatic lesions, 18 (25 %) submucosal masses, and 16 (22 %) lymph nodes. FNA was used first in 24 patients (33 %) and FNB was used first in 49 (67 %). Generally, FNB was performed after FNA to collect tissue for ancillary testing (75 %), whereas FNA was used after FNB to allow for on-site pathological assessment (76 %). Diagnostic accuracy for malignancy of single needle use increased from 78 % to 92 % with dual sampling (P = 0.002). FNA followed by FNB improved the diagnostic accuracy for malignancy (P = 0.03), whereas FNB followed by FNA did not (P = 0.13). CONCLUSION: Dual sampling only improved diagnostic accuracy when 25 G FNA was followed by 20 G FNB and not vice versa. As the diagnostic benefit of the 20 G FNB over the 25 G FNA needle has recently been proven, sampling with the FNB needle seems a logical first choice.

Pancreatic cyst surveillance imposes low psychological burden.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: For the currently recommended pancreatic cyst surveillance to be feasible, participant adherence is a prerequisite. Our objective was to evaluate the psychological burden of pancreatic cyst surveillance from a participant's perspective. METHODS: The present participant survey is part of an international cohort study (PACYFIC study, www.pacyfic.net), which prospectively records the outcome of surveillance of asymptomatic pancreatic cysts. Participants are invited to complete questionnaires before and during cyst surveillance. RESULTS: 109 participants, 31 enrolled before and 78 during surveillance (median time since cyst diagnosis 16.5 (IQR 36) months), returned a total of 179 questionnaires. The majority indicated that surveillance reduces concerns of developing pancreatic cancer (82%), gives a sense of certainty (81%) and is a good method to detect cancer (91%). Participants already undergoing surveillance reported more negative aspects than those still to commence, like sleeping worse (30% vs 13%, P = 0.035), postponing plans (32% vs 13%, P = 0.031), and finding the follow-up burdensome (33% vs 13%, P = 0.044). Overall, the vast majority (94%) deemed advantages to outweigh disadvantages. Anxiety and depression scores were low (median Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale 4 for anxiety (IQR 6), 2 for depression (IQR 5)). CONCLUSION: The psychological burden of pancreatic cyst surveillance is low. Therefore, participant adherence is expected to be high and annual surveillance seems feasible.

A multicenter randomized trial comparing a 25-gauge EUS fine-needle aspiration device with a 20-gauge EUS fine-needle biopsy device.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Several studies have compared EUS-guided FNA with fine-needle biopsy (FNB), but none have proven superiority. We performed a multicenter randomized controlled trial to compare the performance of a commonly used 25-gauge FNA needle with a newly designed 20-gauge FNB needle. METHODS: Consecutive patients with a solid lesion were randomized in this international multicenter study between a 25-gauge FNA (EchoTip Ultra) or a 20-gauge FNB needle (ProCore). The primary endpoint was diagnostic accuracy for malignancy and the Bethesda classification (non-diagnostic, benign, atypical, malignant). Technical success, safety, and sample quality were also assessed. Multivariable and supplementary analyses were performed to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: A total of 608 patients were allocated to FNA (n = 306) or FNB (n = 302); 312 pancreatic lesions (51%), 147 lymph nodes (24%), and 149 other lesions (25%). Technical success rate was 100% for the 25-gauge FNA and 99% for the 20-gauge FNB needle (P = .043), with no differences in adverse events. The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed 25-gauge FNA in terms of histologic yield (77% vs 44%, P < .001), accuracy for malignancy (87% vs 78%, P = .002) and Bethesda classification (82% vs 72%, P = .002). This was robust when corrected for indication, lesion size, number of passes, and presence of an on-site pathologist (odds ratio, 3.53; 95% confidence interval, 1.55-8.56; P = .004), and did not differ among centers (P = .836). CONCLUSION: The 20-gauge FNB needle outperformed the 25-gauge FNA needle in terms of histologic yield and diagnostic accuracy. This benefit was irrespective of the indication and was consistent among participating centers, supporting the general applicability of our findings. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02167074.).

Agreement on endoscopic ultrasonography-guided tissue specimens: Comparing a 20-G fine-needle biopsy to a 25-G fine-needle aspiration needle among academic and non-academic pathologists.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: A recently carried out randomized controlled trial showed the benefit of a novel 20-G fine-needle biopsy (FNB) over a 25-G fine-needle aspiration (FNA) needle. The current study evaluated the reproducibility of these findings among expert academic and non-academic pathologists. METHODS: This study was a side-study of the ASPRO (ASpiration versus PROcore) study. Five centers retrieved 74 (59%) consecutive FNB and 51 (41%) FNA samples from the ASPRO study according to randomization; 64 (51%) pancreatic and 61 (49%) lymph node specimens. Samples were re-reviewed by five expert academic and five non-academic pathologists and rated in terms of sample quality and diagnosis. Ratings were compared between needles, expert academic and non-academic pathologists, target lesions, and cytology versus histological specimens. RESULTS: Besides a higher diagnostic accuracy, FNB also provided for a better agreement on diagnosing malignancy (ĸ = 0.59 vs ĸ = 0.76, P < 0.001) and classification according to Bethesda (ĸ = 0.45 vs ĸ = 0.61, P < 0.001). This equally applied for expert academic and non-academic pathologists and for pancreatic and lymph node specimens. Sample quality was also rated higher for FNB, but agreement ranged from poor (ĸ = 0.04) to fair (ĸ = 0.55). Histology provided better agreement than cytology, but only when a core specimen was obtained with FNB (P = 0.004 vs P = 0.432). CONCLUSION: This study shows that the 20-G FNB outperforms the 25-G FNA needle in terms of diagnostic agreement, independent of the background and experience of the pathologist. This endorses use of the 20-G FNB needle in both expert and lower volume EUS centers.